I think because this is more about exposing corruption in the DoJ than an expose about Caterpillar. Not mentioning the company in the headline can inform you that the heart of the article is the DoJ so that you’re coming into it with the right context.
Wouldn’t it have been easier for NYTimes to use in the title: “Caterpillar” instead of: “a Major Company” ?
I don’t understand that was left out of the title. It’s almost a form of obfuscation that shields said company.
I think because this is more about exposing corruption in the DoJ than an expose about Caterpillar. Not mentioning the company in the headline can inform you that the heart of the article is the DoJ so that you’re coming into it with the right context.