Most of them (youtubers) tell you to test and reproduce their findings yourself, so they don't have to hide anything. IMO classic reviews are worth a lot and Youtube reviews as well, both are important and sides of the same coin. For example Adored often uses data from websites such as TPU, Anand, CB, PCGH and many others to come to conclusions, he is mostly someone who interpretes stuff. At times he reviews as well. I only trust a handful of reviewers in Youtube, and I'm following them since months too. Of course there are bad ones, but there are bad websites (classic reviews) as well. Originally I was only reading stuffs on game magazine called "GameStar" and "ct" it was more than enough for me, nowadays I read multiple websites reviews and watch multiple youtube videos as well, so I'm a lot, but not naive. Anyone who goes around stating simple shit like "youtuber reviews suck" or "youtubers suck" is a blind fool imo. Their work isn't much different too, it's just presented in different ways, so I don't get the negative sentiments against them - I guess some people just disregard things they don't know and therefore don't like.