An executive on a tour, visiting operations and sites of the company's business may feel good at the end of a long day of presentations by the local management team(s), figuring that everything is going smooth and that things are under control, in safe hands and other such cliches.
Armed with this first hand experience, HQ may in turn feel reasonably secure, look at top lines and bottom lines - however in the case of an accident or a disaster, remedial measures would be unleashed. Chances are, it is only in the event of a disaster that remedial measures are thought of.
Given the fear of the messenger being shot, or having fewer friends, etc., it is only obvious that communication systems, especially the bottom-up comm is generally packaged to give the sense of comfort - all is well!
The top-down communication also tends to seek only the good news, if not explicitly but by giving out signs to that effect, and the messengers therefore steer clear till 'the bad news' culminates into a disaster or a failure that impacts the long term prospects.
The fact remains that if bad news is brought to the notice of the leadership/executives of the company, a lot of things can be fixed before them getting downright messy. This approach would invariably instill a sense of insecurity around, but really its a small price to pay for the long term security of the business.
Good news doesn't require any decision making but bad news, if made available asap, can help get a fix on things. Certain organisations formally encourage supervisors and managers alike to find out if someone or some operation is headed towards 'the bad news'... well that's good news, provided organisations take the cue and sensitise their workforce and managers alike that bad news, detected early can actually save the day.