First post sounded like there was some Sony bias in there
Yes the media is biased. It's been well reported that scores get "massaged" if publishers are paying advertising or not. Some websites that get included in aggregator sites are quite clearly biased (any "official" mag", plus some small fanboyish ones), and the user scores at Metacritic etc are laughable for the spoiling-scores that go on.
Add to that a reviewer may have a bias for or against a certain manufacturer, and even worse is their personal bias against a certain genre - RTS games being given to FPS-loving / RTS-tolerating reviewer is going to effect both how well written and insightful a review is, plus how much enjoyment the reviewer will derive.
If this is a continuation of the Killzone 2 (anti)bash, then yes i do agree that Killzone 2 is going to have a hard time with the popular anti-Sony feeling that seems prevalent at the mo, and more generally, i do not think the media is unbiased. Some do better than others, but there's just too many factors coming into the final score to make them viable.
Personally i'd like review scores done away with completely, and just well-written text and justification of the game within the current industry and at it's price-point; eg: Earth Defence Force 2017 has average-rubbish graphics, but was released cheap and is FUN, yet got poor scores despite many reviewers saying what a blast they had with it. Halo 3 got amazing scores yet i thought it mediocrity redefined...