There is almost no intersection between "DPReview" and "journalism".
DPReview lacks
- professionalism (they frequently mess up evaluations / measurements),
- reliability (they frequently need to be corrected by readers about mistakes they made in their descriptions),
- impartiality (they view everything through their electronic gadget fanboy eyes and are apparently incapable of conceiving other types of photographers),
- and consistency (testing/evaluation criteria are all over the place; they don't even conform to their own rules).
The tone of a review will also heavily depend on who the authors are. There is no editorial oversight that addresses inappropriate subtext or consistently biased connotations.
Therefore, it is no wonder that you'll often get bad opinion pieces, rather than reviews, from DPReview.
I think
luftfluss made a good point about evaluations depending on context, but this argument does not absolve DPReview. At the very least, they should have mentioned advantages of systems with increased mass and therefore increased inertia, and refrain from language like "obstrusive". Again, there are positive responses to seeing a camera that does not look like it has been bought at an airport store for electronic gadgets. Models regularly ask me whether I am a professional photographer and I am sure that this is partly owed to the K-1 looking like a professional tool.
BTW, personally I couldn't care less what DPReview or any other site writes about the equipment I use. The poor handling of Pentax equipment by DPReview ("K-1 II is the second-worst camera of 2018", K-1 II gets raked over the coals for processing while other brands get away with similar or worse manipulation, HD D-FA* 50/1.4 is given a "meh" response, HD D-FA* 85/1.4 has not been reviewed, etc.) is still an issue because it will affect Pentax sales. We know that Pentax is mainly focused on Japan, but better overseas sales would surely be welcome and Pentax is simply not given a fair deal by DPReview (Hanlon's razor applies, though).