You're bringing up a very important point here, Bojanix, since whether or not a mag or blog is going to write about a release isn't necessarily related to the quality of the music - in some cases not even to whether or not they like something or not. There's a multitude of reasons at work here: Temporary swings in taste (the reviewer may simply not be in the mood for drones/death metal/disco/dub at this particular point in time), time issues (the reviewer may have some pressing deadlines in his dayjob) as well as trying to keep a balance between different styles and between well-known and new names, for example, between following one's instincts and trying to cater to the tastes of readers.
For me, when I decide to review a release, I make a commitment to the artist and the music and this usually involves an intensive period of spending time with the work, reflecting about it, doing research and then penning, editing and correcting a review. During this period, all new music arriving on my desk is on hold, even if it's absolutely fantastic. My working process is particularly time-consuming, but in the end every journalist has a limited amount of disposable time. So if a reviewer tell you he or she is interested in an album but then doesn't write about it, there's no contradiction from my point of view. There's an element of luck to getting a review in the sense of contacting a reviewer at the right time with the right release. I missed out on the releases of German artist Field Rotation at the time of their first release, for example, but may write about them now, as they're being re-released on vinyl.