The Zuckerberg-Assange Paradox

Thought-provoking picture above, if we all have a right to privacy as stated under Article 8 (see below) of the European Convention Of Human Rights then how come Zuckerberg can sell our information? And if we all have a right to freedom of expression under Article 10 (see further below) of the ECHR then why is Julian Assange not allowed to share public information? Its a contradiction of freedoms. No?

Furthermore, note the wording in Article 10: "this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority," presumably there is some inconceivably small small-print which states that this doesn't cover 'private, secret, and classified media.' Because all Wikileaks is  doing is bringing "important news and information to the public." Right?

ARTICLE 8

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

ARTICLE 10

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. this right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.