I'm sorry this just reads as someone who doesn't understand that SELinux controls almost everything on a box when enabled. Of course you look in its reports when things fail, particularly if it's permission denied or any other denial. This is the modern day equivalent of "they recommended I just chmod everything 777 or run it all as root, but no, I powered through even though it was hard." SELinux is obtuse but it's not difficult once you learn the patterns.
It would be nice if the article writer realized that SELinux was not responsible for the specific error that was being displayed. Additionally, anyone that does linux should know that a permission error is either file system perms or selinux 9 times out of 10.