It reminds me of cases when someone is guilty and at the slightest mention of the problem they start swearing up and down that they are alright, and everything is fine.
The two go together quite well, we hear that most people don't stay at Amazon for more than 2 years, so this could be an existential threat to their current model if they're no longer able to get enough new warm bodies to replace the attrition.
That it was sparked by the first big, really prominent MSM expose strongly suggests its a perception problem of some sort, that article was just more of the same to those of us on HN.
In a way if they didn't have a problem, like let's say the same article came out regarding Google or Facebook, there would have been as much talk about it, and author and the news source would have been condemned and discredited, and it would have been blown over quicker. But in case of Amazon that article keeps coming back somehow.
So it kind of my personal interaction with that company and somehow they managed to screw up so many things in a row, so it definitely left an impression.
Usually if there really is no problem, in most cases people will deny it, and rely on the fact that the situation will sort itself out as a misunderstanding. (Yes, that in some situation ends up biting back and all, but it doesn't deny that people will do that). However if they are guilty they will put their full force in denying it and go the extra mile (as in pull personnel files and share them, write articles about it on blogs months after the incident, and so on).