The analogies that the article uses are very accurate. When I read about the side-effects of CRISPR I was surprised that those involved did not take measurements against this issue. Controlling which area will be edited is the key here. Also the smaller the genome area is, the more difficult it is to target it. Imagine that you need to correct the article "an" to "a" in a big text. Maybe targeting neighbouring areas without changing them is needed in order to increase the size of affected sequence. So you need to change "is an ge" to "is a ge" in "CRISPR is a gene editing technique" sentence.
What did you read? Off-target changes are a major topic in gene editing approaches, and are universally reported. It is among the chief advantages for CRISPR. There are hundreds of papers that discuss this, and dozens where it is the focus of the article. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=crispr+specificity
The specificity has been perfectly acceptable for many research purposes for several years now. The current issue is increasing this even more to be suitable for clinical applications. There are many strategies being considered.
