As I learned from my journalism course your editor/boss will ask you "Why we no got?"
Writers are put in a position where they're expected to have something when everyone else does, and when you show up and don't have what everyone else has it always comes down to "Why we no got?"
Aside from the argument about reviews games before the public has them:
I follow a group of people in the games industry whom I respect and trust their opinion on stuff, I don't bother at looking at metacritic or the reviews on websites I don't go to anymore.
It isn't because I think these people are bad reviewers or anything, I just don't them as well as others.
Take Jeff for example, I've listened and followed his reviews for years and years so I know what he likes and what he means when reviewing something. So when there's a situation where my thoughts on a game clash with his, I understand. Because either he's explaining his position well or his personal tastes don't align with mine.
I just think it's crazy to assume they're liars or being bribed.