Currently, they buy carbon offsets to be net-neutral. The goal is to buy carbon-neutral energy in the first place.

>” its offsets so far have focused mainly on capturing natural gas where it's escaping from pig farms and landfill sites. ”

Currently via offsets above; in the future via carbon-free energy.

I agree. It sounds better than it actually is, but on the other hand it helps mop up others’ sloppiness.

Pretty sure the data centers and offices are counted in the all-time carbon footprint of zero. Your second quote is talking about switching to carbon-free energy, which is different from the carbon offsets referred to by your first quote.

It's the difference between offsets (use fossil fuels and pay for equivalent carbon capture) versus operating on carbon-free energy.

Exactly. My TL;DR is:

Company that doesn’t use fossil fuels claims it doesn’t use fossil fuels.

More nuanced. They purchased carbon credits without providing how much carbon they claim to have produced. I highly doubt the credits they purchased will actually come close to their emissions.