People can be video game reviewers without reviewing any specific video game.

Since entertainment reviews across every industry have by and large become another component in whitewashed marketing, it's not really much of a distinction to make between tacit promotion by a reviewer and their review.

When Weinstein told casting directors that actresses that rebuffed him were difficult to work with and promoted to films of those that didn't, I'm sure his biases weren't as transparent in light of his professional reputation. Was that not a breach of ethics on multiple fronts?

I’m not entirely sure what you’re on about - barely anyone went after Nathan Grayson after the reveal of the alleged incident. Isn’t he the one who supposedly breached reviewing ethics through some mythical article?

Gamergate went after Kotaku and tried to get them to do something about Nathan Grayson's conduct.

http://deepfreeze.it/outlet.php?o=Kotaku

At some point one of Kotaku's editors(maybe, its been a while) stated that there were no ethical violations.

Gamergate then worked to boycott Kotaku and get advertisers to move away from the site.

There was a single case of a journalist who mentioned one of Zoe Quinn's games in an article... before they had ever actually met. I fail to see the ethical breach there.

It wasn't just an ethical breach, it was a felony. And he is now being investigated for rape in NYC and LA, and being sued for breach of contract and various other torts.

A great many people in Hollywood began to ignore Weinstein's claims after they became public (to the industry) knowledge, though this was unfortunately too late for some of his earlier victims like Asia Argento and Annabella Sciorra.