Yeah it reads like a clumsy hit piece - not that the industry doesn't have problems but it falls so short of professional writing standards you have to ask if they get paid for it.
I think the issue with gaming "journalism" is that it's supposed to be for the consumers so that they can do informed purchases, but since it's ad-funded by the industry they are reporting on, it tends to become a corporate mouth-piece.
That particular publication also tends to be the electric bug zapper for a lot of chuds, so there's a lot of misinformation out there.
What's that mean?
This article kinda sucks, but the groups taking shots at Kotaku/Polygon/etc. at this point tend towards a default-chud stance.
I think it's fair to watch the watchmen. Journalists and outside observers shouldn't be demonized for being critical of media, and likewise people shouldn't be demonized for being critical of journalists who err in their duty in some way.
Too bad they tend to make more noise than those who criticize Kotaku/Polygon/RPS/etc. for reviews for friends. Hum I suspect the journalists are even happy that their loudest critics are besides the point.