Most of the readings shown in that list are on the order of 10% of EPA allowable maximums. The article fails to note this, and also fails to note what background levels are normal (if any). To their credit, they do list the information, but the presentation is pure alarmist. It’s a serious situation, and real quantitative monitoring and rational assessment is needed. Unfortunately, much of what gets posted here lacks the latter.
It’s not to their credit that they listed one reading from each of a few sites. As you also said, they left off anything that makes those readings understandable.
It’s like saying a baseball score is 7-3 without noting which teams are playing or who is winning. It is almost pure fear-mongering.