Who needs to pretend. Did you actually read the whole interview. Do you know the question that was asked and what he was answering. In other words, you took a quote, without actually understanding the complete context or question asked and formed an opinion. This is what I am talking about, and I see it all the time. You state he is attacking Sony, or is he just giving his opinion on what he like and dislike based on the question asked. You made a statement and formed an opinion that was different then what Phil actually said concerning a topic. When the text did not line up with what you thought, you then massaged it to your opinion which is still not correct. The thing is, Phil did not say what you stated and it still doesn't play with your opinion.
Let me ask you as question, what does PR actually means to you. When Phil takes an interview and answer a question, how do you view his statements. Is the weight of his answers whether correct or incorrect weigh more than lets say someone like Major Nelson. So when you say his statements is PR, exactly what are you trying to say. Of course any statements made are public relations, the question is the weight of those statements and who they come from. Coming from someone who is doing QA in MS compared to the head of the division is totally different.
I've went down this rabbit hole before with him and others here and for the most part, no, they don't read the entire interview, or apply any context whatsoever to the answer, or the question itself. And anything that is read is only read through the rosiest of tinted glasses. From this angle it's very easy to accuse someone of spin or "lies" as is the most constant thing thrown around on this forum.