Well I think they were aware that she was comatose, yes. You don't have Big Brother there do you? There are cameras everywhere. They were watching and they knew she was unconscious. That is made perfectly clear in the article.
I don't know where you read that in the article you posted, it said nothing about that. It was recorded, obviously, but how were those cameras monitored? Was one person responsible for looking at a bunch of screens, did a single screen flip through a bunch of different cameras? In either case it could be that no one was looking at the screen right away.
Clearly they were completely out to lunch showing this women the footage, they ought to have turned it over to the police, at least if she wanted them to, and those shows IMO are a disaster waiting to happen in any ways. But I don't see how, on the basis of that article alone, you can say what the monitoring situation was, and that will make a difference in term of the company's responsibility for the rape itself.