Usually I find that when a writer feels they need to start a Biblical comment article with;
"I read the Bible cover to cover and studied it very hard and read up on it and I know it REEELY GUD...."
... It will likely be the worst thing I've read in a long time.
The article "Why are black people obsessed with the Bible that was used to enslave them?" did not disappoint.
Now usually when reading such a poorly researched pile of conjecture, assumptions and lack of research I just sigh.
(See "[Missionaries] went to Africa to spread the gospel and saw an opportunity to enslave black people to make their lives better using the very gospel they were spreading.")
I could go on and on, but you have a nice little disclaimer at the bottom about the author's views not necessarily being those of modern Ghana. So I won't waste too much of your time.
But do note, no matter the disclaimer, you put up an article taking 500 years of complex history and condensing it into simple statements and 'black and white.'
Polarising people into groups for simple aims is done easily and carefree by only putting it into type and letting it out for whoever will print it. To get a good representation for of an issue - or a company - takes more thought.