Like a review?
There is no problem with a review mentioning the creators issues, or improper sexualisation or political pandering or whatever. You can even mention if the game has a FOV slider or not, which is irrelavant to almost everyone but a life or death feature for others. This does not mean that it has to impact your purchasing decision in any way.
But you know, it might. Which is the whole point of a review.
I'm going to make a deliberately stupid, exaggerated comparison for the sake of making a point clear. I'm aware that it's stupid and exaggerated. Please forgive me.
Your argument is that these things could be relevant for the purchasing decisions of some people, so they should be included. People for whom it's not relevant can ignore it. The problem though is that you can
always go into more detail—choosing when to stop is an important editorial decision.
Here's my stupid example. This is a review of Pokémon OmegaRuby. It's 7 hours long. It goes into incredibly thorough detail about every single element of the game, most of which are never even touched upon by reviewers and yet are big elements of the game for some people and would highly affect their purchasing decisions (such as Pokémon Contests).
Obviously, no normal review should be 7 hours long. Hell, 10 minutes is pushing it for most big sites.
Things can't be included in "standard reviews" just because some people might find it important, it has to be judged on whether it's important
enough to your target audience that it ought to be.
A site like Waypoint usually will, because that's their target audience. IGN usually won't. I personally prefer the latter, and all I said in my original comment was what I personally prefer.
