In all seriousness, Ars Technica did a terrible job on even doing a cursory search on his social profile. Like holy shit, do a background check at least.
The guy has been writing in the field for 20 years (please correct me if I misunderstood this - edit : 10 years at Ars, wasn't a pro writer before that but in the digital induatry) and was a "known quantity", before even the social media age, as far as his skill, competence, ability to deliver and probably a friend / acquaintance / part of the social circle in some capacity.
I mean what would a "background check" even turn up ? That he had a bunch of racy / saucy / bad taste tweets (obnoxiously so), a loud online persona and kind of an asshole maybe ? None of it has any bearing on his capacity to work. Being abrasive might even be considered a good thing for an outline outlet, that's a pretty common character that can stoke audience engagement.
Unless there's some shady shit happening at ArsTechnica, there's no link between his employment and the twisted illegal shit he's accused of. I'm a bit mellow at the idea of "background checks" conducted by employers as a panacea.
TLDR Hindsight is 20/20.
