1-Any professional reviews are, by definition, ones that have no manufacturer or publisher pressure to like the product ( in exchange for buying it cheaply etc) and/or don’t sugarcoat any problems with it. In a professionally run publication, the mere existence of advertising doesn’t alter this at all. A quick example being in my newspaper reporter days, due to the large amount of advertising bought by the local auto dealers, any article written criticizing them or their products would likely never run. This clearly was a breach of the trust the community had in the paper.
2-Further, the lack of reviews for a brand may not be what they seem - ie they don’t advertise so they don’t get covered - the truth is that if a brand doesn’t provide review samples, the only alternative is to have reviews written by those who’ve liked the product enough to buy it - hardly an objective source of criticism.
3-That said, there are publishers and reviewers that enjoy being in a position to get equipment cheaply, or even free, and are subsequently less than objective in their reviews. There are also reviewers that fancy themselves to be more like Hemingway than necessary, wasting, as the OP said, time and review space. The late Art Dudley was generally good at mixing just the right amount of storytelling with his opinions, creating very entertaining reviews imho. Others don’t do it as well.
Any publisher/editor worthy of the title should solicit reader opinions and act accordingly when his (or her) readers point out that the reviews aren’t providing enough (or any) pertinent information. We aren’t buying the magazines just to see the ads.
