Because the company is the one who "bribed". I honestly do not understand this thought that a company should be able to do whatever they want, with no consequences, because they're trying to profit.
Who is saying that a company should be able to do "whatever they want", "without consequences"? For profit, or any other reason. Not even Libertarians and Anarcho-Capitalists believe that. So either you have some odd way of thinking about it, or you're constructing a fictional straw-man.
You're the one asking why the company should be blamed. You wouldn't be doing that if you didn't think that a company should be able to do stuff like this.
