The FT uses a modern(ish) communication stack. Gapps and slack throughout. So if this ia a work feed, then that raises interesting issues. However I suspect this is based on her private devices.
For certain journalist there is a "secure room" (well its not a room yet, that comes later) with isolated throwawy hardware for viewing potentially insteresting files. But I don't shes not part of that team.
And chances are there are some security researchers who wouldn't mind diverting those devices from the trash...
(My curiosity honestly probably stems from the fact that I'm always on the lookout for unorthodox ways to upgrade my own _very_ old tech)
While not throwaway hardware, the company I work for destroys hard drives and other persistent memory devices before discarding computers. If the persistent memory device cannot be easily and reliably destroyed, the whole device is.
I bet journalists with sensitive information are far more thorough.
destruction is rather fun actually, after wiping, memory/disk is removed and taken apart manually. lots of magnets to play with.
I'm not a journo. More importantly the browser I was using didn't have a working spell check. This all compounds the obvious, which is; I can't spell for shit, and my proof reading is also notably weak.