I don't mean to single you out, but it's statements like this that show you have no idea what you're talking about.
Numerous websites have reformed their code of ethics, disclosure of prior relationships have been enforced in multiple places, and yes, when it comes to reviews that can influence sales, relationships absolutely matter. Like when indie devs mentioned how a certain, well-reported on indie competition was rigged from the inside or when PCgamer was forced to update its disclosure agreement in 2015 after it turned out that one of their writers was romantically involved with a Communications Associate that worked for a company he was going on about.
This isn't a case of "wah, I don't like your reviews." It's a case of positively plugging the games of people you know and like, which is clear breach of ethics when it comes to coverage.
But again, no one wants to read any of this. Everyone's decided their feelings on the matter. Despite there being a long precedent of certain websites covering for their clickbait bloggers.
In before someone argues my sources and not their contents. I'm not even a Gamergate person, I just think it's folly to go "Welp, some folks acted like the internet on the internet, clearly there's nothing at all to see here."
I do know what I'm talking about, thank you very much, but I'm focusing upon the uncalled for harassment over "ethics" in game reviews, AKA opinions over entertainment. It's nothing about clickbait. It's nothing about sales. It's about procedure and tact. There's nothing excusable about threatening rape and violence, and you're a fool if you think otherwise. If I threatened every politician, news reporter, or website author with rape and violence for doing something I don't agree with, guess what? I'd be sitting in jail right now. If I wanted to pitch that much of a fit about it while carrying my argument in a mature, adult-like manner, I'd take it to court.