I was reminded of this recently by a fursuit company issuing a C&D over an accusation most people had forgotten about, for a tweet that was almost half a year old at that point.
24 hours later, the tweet from the target of the C&D has over 7000 retweets and the response from the company has almost 1400 quote retweets yelling at them. Many of the angry responses have as many retweets as the company's tweet.
Hopefully your CTO was.
Most likely, the story is true enough that the companies do not have a case for libel, even if specific details may be wrong, and the companies don't want a lawsuit because that opens then up to discovery proving that the foundational elements of the story are true.
These are publicly traded companies - everything they say is scrutinized.
What's not scrutinized is internal communications and logs, which would be fair game in discovery in event of a lawsuit against a media organization, which are uniquely suited to defend those types of lawsuits.
So the idea is that Bloomberg, a company owned by a multibillionaire, published a story full of libel, and for some inexplicable reason none of the corporations damaged by that story sued them?
Or maybe ... the story is true, and those mentioned found it embarrassing, so they put out denials to the press and social media that will never have to be scrutinized (say, under testimonial oath in a deposition)?