>I'm curious what other people think the informational value of these hearings are.
Considering that they are not even under oath, precisely zero. They can lie to the lawmakers' faces with no recourse.
I very distinctly remember Jack telling congress the time before last that they "do not shadowban", and then screenshots of their admin dashboard were leaked[1] that show they explicitly did have multiple kinds of shadowbans.
Considering that they are not even under oath, precisely zero. They can lie to the lawmakers' faces with no recourse.
I very distinctly remember Jack telling congress the time before last that they "do not shadowban", and then screenshots of their admin dashboard were leaked[1] that show they explicitly did have multiple kinds of shadowbans.
[1]: https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgxd3d/twitter-insider-acces...
Disregard that first sentence, apparently they are all sworn in by default. It's just that perjury is barely ever pursued.