I still don't get why the author thinks it's OK to assign blame to 538 for readers interpreting things incorrectly when Nate clearly spends a significant amount of time trying to educate the readers on how to interpret.

It makes no sense to me to hold 538 accountable for readers interpretations of the data. If I wander into some realm of science I'm unfamiliar with (say, quantum mechanics) and start making false inferences from it, does that mean the scientists were misleading me?