The photo is subtitled “ Representative image of a vintage notebook, not Marie Curie's. Photo via Pexels.” so it’s clear it’s not trying to be deceptive. It’s entirely common, even among the best human authors, to put in a photo to give some idea of a topic when actual photos are hard to obtain.

> This would be a great topic but this specific article isn't worth your time.

Why? Do you think it reports inaccurate facts? Personally, I found it interesting and easy to read.