huh?

i have my accounts with wachovia, so this article interested me:

"Wachovia apologizes for slavery ties"
http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/02/news/fortune500/wachovia_slavery/index.htm?cnn=yes

why does anyone seem surprised to learn that companies started in the 1800s employed people or were started by people that owned slaves? i fail to see the reason behind this public disclosure. too little, too late, no? at this point in time, there isn't anything that wachovia can do about acquired institutions being associated with slavery. it just doesn't make any sense to me. that these two companies acquired by wachovia used to hold slaves doesn't change the way wachovia handles their business now.

i don't know, things like this frustrate me. not to trivialize an important part of this country's history, but how does public acknowledgement of past wrongdoing make anything better (in this situation)? it's one thing for the government to acknowledge and apologize for slavery, but it seems absurd for financial institutions to say, "hey we had slaves a long time ago. we're sorry."

maybe there's more to this that i'm just not seeing...