By doing both? Both the family and the company want to avoid a media blowup about the death, so keeping quiet protects both the family and Facebook's corporate interests (and probably also the mental health of other employees).
The argument people are making is that it doesn't protect society's interests, but as far as I can tell, Facebook isn't claiming it is.
Being quiet about the specifics of the individual case does not prevent them from having a transparent discussion of company policies and practices that may have contributed. The argument is that this does not protect employees' interests because it allows these practices to continue unexamined.
Comments
By doing both? Both the family and the company want to avoid a media blowup about the death, so keeping quiet protects both the family and Facebook's corporate interests (and probably also the mental health of other employees).
The argument people are making is that it doesn't protect society's interests, but as far as I can tell, Facebook isn't claiming it is.
Being quiet about the specifics of the individual case does not prevent them from having a transparent discussion of company policies and practices that may have contributed. The argument is that this does not protect employees' interests because it allows these practices to continue unexamined.