Not really, none of the second article's philosophy seems to show up in this article: "Hold Yourself Accountable/ Help With the Dirty Work/ Be an Engineering Management Ally/ Be a World Class Copilot" seems to conflict with their scenario "In any case, PM acting as QA is not a healthy state. If PM is catching lots of bugs in UAT, engineering teams need to re-evaluate their QA strategy and fix the problem ASAP".

Also as commented, the OP makes too many implicit generalized assumptions about the org: that PM and developers report to a similar management chain (that's often not the case, depends on the org) or at least is aligned with compatible incentives. Their throwaway remark "if the engineering team is much less tenured than the PM" and the lack of inquiring about why that scenario might have arisen makes you wonder, too.