WHEN REVIEWERS GET CONFUSED

I know I've probably complained about this before, but I feel the need to do so again. I am really bothered by reviewers who write certain things about artwork that is completely wrong. The latest I read was something pertaining to digital artwork. The reviewer was talking about it like it wasn't... talking about the "brush strokes." Um... digital artwork doesn't have brush strokes. It's digital. Am I just being too technical? I don't know. I think the reviewer really thought the artwork was done using traditional methods. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the brightness and perfectness of the digital will blow reviewers and award givers away and traditional methods will become obsolete... or maybe no one will know the difference between the two methods anyway (except for curmudgeonly people like me).