Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are they saying that is inaccurate about the article?
They aren't telling us anything because of "privacy" concerns. Here is what the official response from Sid was: "There was an article published in The Register today regarding the recent departures of female leaders from our company. There were multiple inaccuracies in the article. Because we value the privacy of our current and former employees, we do not discuss personnel issues publicly." EDIT: the official respon…
A way to lead on transparency might be to share number of investigations, internal and external, and what the findings were. There are ways to share findings without revealing names. Additionally, a company can benefit from transparent remediation discussions, which are very important.
Transparency is easy when it comes to being transparent about things you want to get out into the world. The old humble brag approach to transparency, if you will. But, values are only values if they are upheld when it's hard.
I'm not aware of any laws that require investigation findings to be private. However, ignoring material risks has huge penalties. This isn't legal advice, but willfully violating laws, in the US, is oftentimes the basis for treble damages,