Also thinking - You need to take price into account as just one facet...
Eg. Take a $1,000 brake kit vs a $10,000 one.
Obviously performance will not be "on par", but it comes down to an economy of scale. If you get 60% of the performance for 90% cost saved, that would hopefully be covered in the review, then it's not really a shit product. It's just suiting the market that it is targeted at and so on.
Plenty of things to look at more in depth and hence the reviews will not be release by "anyone", it will be from someone on the team so they know the requirements and the group can talk/discuss a review before it goes ahead, during, after etc to workout the best way to benefit everyone who will read it.
But that's not to say if you pay 10k for a product in a market that expects it to be better - than such comments cannot be said.
Anyone (business etc) that approaches the Review Team with a product will be made very aware that if the product is indeed lack lustre or does not perform - it will be published as such.
I think most legitimate people would support that - and if not, their loss on market exposure and testing.
Plenty of PC parts get called out as under performing, yet companies still submit other things for review that are comparatively awesome