It would allow Zuckerberg to talk more candidly. Public perception and opinion is very important to any of these billion-dollar business leaders. If you have an open hearing then there is a snowball's chance in hell that you will hear anything that wasn't carefully planned by teams of PR guys and lawyers.
A closed hearing won't be picked apart and (mis)interpreted ever which way, so the speaker can try to get their true point across. The speaker can also acknowledge faults and mention some sensitive issues without making their company's stock ride a rollercoaster.
Nothing could influence Zuckerberg to talk candidly in front of regulators, he'll be speaking the same carefully planned legalese. At least with a public hearing, the public have the benefit of watching him try to bullshit everybody.
> A closed hearing won't be picked apart and (mis)interpreted ever which way, so the speaker can try to get their true point across.
In the same post, this is a very good counter-point, I think. Anything this high-profile will be cherry-picked and de-contextualized a million times. Including in Facebook posts, ironically. Speaking candidly is bad PR for anyone that visible, no matter how virtuous.
The power differential between randoms taking something he says out of context and that of Zuckerberg himself does not really garner much sympathy for him and his company here.
A closed hearing won't be picked apart and (mis)interpreted ever which way, so the speaker can try to get their true point across. The speaker can also acknowledge faults and mention some sensitive issues without making their company's stock ride a rollercoaster.