Cameras are tools for making images / stories. Reviews of tools are different from reviews of consumable items. These are not luxury phones of a 1000 dollar price. A hammer is a hammer and the review of said hammer needs to address the point of that specific tool.
Everyone here seems to act as if cameras exist solely to be reviewed and analysed and then put on the shelf until another product appears. "Look at this amount of megapixels, my goodness the dr is so huge! You can't use this, the rolling shutter is huge!" The reviews of youtube people tend to come at cameras from a very consumer oriented standpoint. Philip Blooms review - in the case of FX9 for example - is made for people that are professionals in the field and who actually would use an FX9 to create something. They are not really meant for the EOSHD / Youtube crowd. They are meant more for one man documentary use cases (as that is Blooms background and he reviews cameras based on that). Professionals already know would an FX9 be good for them before they even look at Blooms review but if they are thinking about the FX9 the review may address some issues. A 15-year old thinking about the next 900 dollar dslr it is not. Sales people are bad? Everytime you go out and try to figure out if a certain camera is yours or not, you will have to use your brain. Good sales people give you options, bad sales people sell you a specific tool not caring if it's for you or not. But guess what, random people on the internet review forums (who have no money involved) do the exact same thing because they might have no actual use for the camera they parrot.
What is more "honest advertising" for you, a 60 second ad before a youtube video of a new Full Frame FX9 (with a bunch of buzzwords) or a "review" done in the style of Bloom (one hour, loads of different info) which is disclosed as being from Sony. I would always prefer the latter but they are also way more rare.
When people here call marketing "trickery" or even evil, it kinda makes me wonder what do you guys do with your camera? If the marketing tricked you into buying something that doesn't do it's job, what are you doing with that tool?
If I would be buying a 10 grand camera I would most likely ask about it from people that I know first, people who have actually used it for a specific purpose (for example, documentaries). I guess that could be construed as a personal relationship except without the internet. Internet reviews would only be used to gauge technical specs about the camera and it's suitability for certain jobs. Philip Blooms review would be helpful in taking a look at certain things coming from an fs7 user. But it wouldn't be the only review I watch but usability wise it would give out a lot of info.
After a certain pricepoint, professionals don't really care what the internet says and that's one of the reasons the Alexa is more popular then Red for filmmaking.