Thanks for making sure we wouldn't miss this, I probably would have. Edit to add: it is unusual in that he's not just analyzing, he's offering suggested solutions for beseiged White House beat reporters frustrated by being played but not knowing what to do about it since editors/producers don't seem to be giving much guidance:

Trump’s tweets are not random, they are strategic. There are four types: 1) Pre-emptive framing, to get a framing advantage. 2) Diversion, to divert attention when news could embarrass him. 3) Deflection: Shift the blame to others. And 4) trial balloon – test how much you can get away with. Reporting, and therefore repeating, Trump’s tweets just gives him more power. There is an alternative. Report the true frames that he is trying to pre-empt. Report the truth that he is trying to divert attention from. Put the blame where it belongs. Bust the trial balloon. Report what the strategies are trying to hide [.....]

How can the press do a better job? Here are some basic suggestions:

First, journalists must understand how propaganda works on the brain and grasp the cognitive science that marketers of propaganda have implicitly mastered: frames, metaphors, narratives and brain basics.

Second, keep a steely focus on the fact that American democracy is under attack by a foreign power, possibly with collusion from the sitting president’s campaign. This is a crisis. Certain rules don’t apply in a crisis, especially the rule that the press must amplify the president’s words, whatever they are.

Third, stop letting Trump control the news cycle. Newsgathering should be a serious affair controlled by editors whose power rivals any politician’s. Stop chasing his tweets and elevating every sideshow. Start every story with truth and the context of what’s really important to citizens in a democracy. More BBC, less TMZ.

Fourth, don’t spread lies. Don’t privilege Trump’s lies by putting their specific language in the headlines [....]

Most notably, I think, he's giving them  and editors support for not following the usual "rules".

There is a Catch 22 involved with the suggestion:

This is a crisis. Certain rules don’t apply in a crisis, especially the rule that the press must amplify the president’s words, whatever they are.

One of the clearest indications that there is a critical problem is provided by the problem itself. However high or low the volume is turned up to, the state of emergency is deplored and celebrated at the same time.

Imagine that you are working far from home with no easy way to get back. On the webcam, you suddenly see vandals break in and start trashing the place. The crew you hired to take care of the grounds are brought into view wearing cuffs and duct tape. Your metabolism quivers in the futility of rage. Long, deep breaths prevent you from being enveloped within an adrenergic storm.
Sounds of cheering are now coming from the adjacent hotel room. When you go to investigate, the door is ajar. Nobody is in the room but a large TV displaying a studio audience watching you watching your webcam five minutes ago.

Videodrome this, Mr Lakofff. I believe Baudrillard just stole your Prius.