I think these comments are rather unfair. I've been buying model railway magazines since 1967 and have read every title at one time or another. The very nature of our hobby means that a "Which" type of approach would not be appropriate and I cannot ever recall any model railway magazine taking a campaigning stance on a product. Editorial staff at all of the mainstream magazines require the cooperation and support of manufacturers and retailers, so adopting an adverserial "Watchdog" attitude is not going to help their cause, let alone ours as consumers. I would also point out that Model Rail reviews do list what they regard as negative aspects of a product, as well as the positive. I am not acting as an apologist for the model railway press here, but I do feel some balance is in order.
As someone who has worked in PR roles I do think that Hornby have, to some extent, fallen down on the VEP issue, but that is their choice as a business. My choice as a consumer was to cancel pre-orders as soon as the lengthening list of defects began to emerge. I will continue to withhold my business until I am convinced the product is worth my hard-earned cash. That is my choice. If, as and when Hornby do decide to undertake some positive PR I am sure the magazines will report it.
Incidentally, thanks to St Simon of this parish, I was able to directly compare a Hornby VEP (NSE version) with a Bachmann CEP last weekend. It was the first example I had seen in the flesh, so to speak, and it not only ran quite well on Hythe Parkway, but looked the part too. However, (IMHO) the CEP eclipsed it in smoothness and controllability, merely confirming what I had already learned by reading the honest comments in this thread.