You should try and write a fearmongering article and see if it makes it in! Seriously though, it's not like they ran the story solely because of a screenshot.

You should try and write a fearmongering article and see if it makes it in! Seriously though, it's not like they ran the story solely because of a screenshot. Other things they likely considered (being a reputable news source [1]) would include the source of the information and historical accuracy of that source, additional source material that was not fit for publication (confidentiality, irrelevent beyond proving accuracy of information, etc.), and other independent verification (reaching out to potential affected companies, communication with the sellers, viewing the advertisement for the material, etc.). On top of that, writing the article in this way allows for expansion and updates as more information is confirmed or comes to light. Welcome to how reputable news companies work. They generally don't make stuff up on the spot based on a screenshot. [1]https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ars-technica/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ars-technica/