Reading that article, the confusion is easy to explain and looks intentional.

It reads "For certain sensitive information, Apple uses end-to-end encryption. This means that only you can access your information" and then immediate shows a giant table of data that is NOT end-to-end encrypted, but not labelled as such -- it's only inferrable by its omissions from the next section of the document.

I agree. It doesn't look like Apple was particularly keen on letting people know that they can actually read most data that people consider private.