Yes, this annoyed me slightly while reading the article. But, it's typical in common speech to use "electrocute" to mean "to deliver a significant electrical shock". Since there's no concise way to express that concept, and it is probably a more common occurrence than true electrocution, it makes sense that people have adapted the word this way. I expect this is one of those cases of language evolving where this meaning will eventually make it into dictionaries. At least it's more functional than using "literally" in the place of "figuratively".

I was not aware of this! I thought 'electrocute' applied to any situation where electricity (perhaps harmfully) passed into a body.

Thank you for correcting a long outstanding misconception of mine.

I agree with you, but was disturbed to discover a couple of weeks ago that Google does not. A search for "define electrocute" returns a definition that includes injury, not necessarily death.

  > injure or kill someone by electric shock.