This all seems way off base. This article on the Rebecca Black phenomenon gets nearer the mark:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14190712

Or as Liberace put it after getting a bad review, "I cried all the way to the bank".

The conception that good reviews make reputations and bad ones break them was probably never very accurate and it certainly isn't now. As far as a media publisher is concerned, reviews are an entertainment product. The reviewer's primary function is to keep the reader turning the pages or clicking onto the next screen. It matters not at all whether the review is positive, negative, truthful or even sincere. It DOES matter whether the writing is good.

It would probably help if all reviews were of imaginary recordings and performances, like those stories by Borges and Lem that review imaginary books.