No, one need simply apply common sense when reading reviews. They are one person's specific views on the game. So read/listen what they have to say, and knowing yourself, and what you value in your games, judge whether said review has merit enough to influence your decision to purchase. So many people get hung up on scores, but scores are entirely subjective, and ultimately pointless. A detailed account of a games strengths and shortcomings is what's truly valuable in a review. It's not exactly hard to tell when a reviewer is just shamelessly bashing a game or actually giving you a useful insight.

And if one of these reviewers who's just shamelessly bashing games is published on sites like metacritic.....who cares? They are hurting their own reputation, and that will catch up with then sooner or later.

Some reviewers go for the crazy scores to get more clicks so having a 'wall of shame' will just make them more popular, which is what they are aiming for anyways..

but even besides that, I don't think this would work anyways

The only oversight any kind of journalism should have, is by other journalists and their editors. The problem is, we have a ton of 'journalists' and 'editors', who really have no concern over ethical journalistic practices. Read the SPJ's Code of Journalistic Ethics, and then go and read virtually any article on basically any game. Those who actually adhere to such things, are very, very few and far between.

So, in a perfect world, other journalists, the SPJ and editors would expose the poor practices of these entities. Unfortunately, gaming simply isn't viewed as serious enough to warrant such a push. Though, it's apparently serious enough to poison the minds of every male on the planet, because, you know, patriarchy.