Well, sure, if I was an unthinking, bi-polar human being only capable of either bashing or metaphorical rainbows, I suppose that'd be an issue. In between that wide gulf you've created is where most writers would work to understand the context of those decisions, find a way to respectfully challenge some of those decisions, and express an opinion that was both fair and appropriately critical. If we're still talking about Goose/AB, we've done that plenty:
here,
here,
here,
here and
here.
There are also twelve other writers and an independent Editorial Director in GBH's network that have no connection whatsoever to Goose or AB. That's my burden, not theirs.
But I don't know what world you come from, so maybe you're more used to yes men and crazy people who just want to watch the world burn. Over here, we're more than capable of handling the pressure of someone wanting a positive review and not giving it to them, like adults.
And the irony is that because of that very normal ability, we actually get hired again, by many different people, that see us as reasonable, responsible, and honest people that they can trust. If I hired someone who only gave me these metaphorical rainbows instead of the actual critical input I needed, that's the person I would fire. I understand the cynical expectation you have of how the world might work, but for people who are serious about growing a business and improving their performance, you've got it backwards. In my experiences in the beer world, rainbows get you fired and questioning decisions gets you hired.