Transparency & trust should start with us getting any appropriate details & information about important events which are relevant to us from the company before the press does, which didn't happen recently as discussed in Stack Exchange staff speaking to the press instead of the community. Instead, almost a week after the main issue occurred, we got An Update to our Community and an Apology. Very quickly, it was heavily down voted and there were many answers posted, with all of the ones which I read being mostly critical. Based on what the post said, I'm not surprised. After such a relatively long period of mostly silence from the company, did they really expect this new post, with basically no new information & a mostly boilerplate type response, would be considered reasonable by very many members here, and would help in any way to calm things down (rather than further inflame passions as it seems to mostly have done instead)? IMHO, it basically doesn't do anything to improve transparency, communication or trust with the users.
The way the company has been responding (or, more accurately, not usually responding) to concerns here, and communicating (actually, often not communicating) with the members, over the past week, as well as more generally over the past several years, is not particularly reasonable or logical to me. It's the hard work of various members, in particular the moderators and power users (note I am very grateful for the long, hard, unpaid work these people have done, and are continuing to do), which has helped to provide the large amount of excellent content, thus allowing the overall Stack Exchange set of Web sites, in particular the largest one of Stack Overflow, to become so successful. IMHO, we deserve better consideration from the company.
I hope the company realizes their recent actions, in particular how they've so far handled the "firing" of Monica Cellio, is causing a lot of anger & hurt in the community. Based on my understanding, it was for not agreeing to follow somebody's interpretation of an aspect of the proposed new CoC (Code of Conduct) policy, which is not even in effect yet & which, at least theoretically, could still be changed before implementation in such a way it would no longer be an issue. This strongly reminded me of the Minority Report movie.
These types of actions, and inactions, is basically "killing the golden goose". From what I've read, and seen to some extent, too many companies, especially public ones, are overly focused on the short-term and disregard the long-term effects of their decisions. I believe there's enough high quality questions & answers on the various sites for the company to be able to continue making a lot of money from them for quite a long while, even if nothing much new of any reasonable quality was coming in. However, a lot of content, especially if it's technology related (which, overall, is the large majority of the SE content), tends to date fairly quickly, so its value will quite rapidly decrease. I believe it's better & more logical, for the long-term health of the company, to do a more appropriate job of listening, trying to act on and respond to the members here, plus it should not necessarily need to cost a lot nor cause any significant loss of revenue (in fact, avoiding bad publicity such as what has been arising here since Monica's "firing" should help to improve revenue, even in the short term).
Update on Oct. 6, 2019: The post of just a few hours ago of An apology to our community, and next steps is an excellent step in the right direction, even though it still did not address several important unresolved issues. As one of its answers basically says, this should have occurred much sooner, but better late than never. I hope that what was expressed there is more than just words, with various concrete actions happening based on what it said the company would do. Also, going forward, I hope they provide more such communications, along with listening to us & takingmore and, where appropriate, taking actions based on those interactions.