Partly it's the tone. It's kind of accusatory in places, as though his expectation is that show casing these things should have been a point of development from the outset. Like "The lack of emphasis on drug sentencing is a glaring oversight." (Not actual quote.) Well, no, it's not a glaring oversight. It's just not fleshed out in the alpha build.
It's his seeming desire for atrocities to be up on display that makes me think he's not seeing the idea of a simulation as a whole. You don't start a simulation by going "Ok, how do I make hunger strikes happen." You spend a year and a half building an environment where something like that has context. Which is what Introversion has done.
It's basically a journalist who has spent probably 8 hours on a game, probably not read the forums or listened to developer commentary, getting a little breathless because he wants to address a larger social issue. He doesn't hate the game and they don't hate his review. Tonally though, I have problems with it and I'd question if it comes down to his own perception of what's most important. (i.e, the message not the game or having a great sandbox.) Maybe he was playing an older build before policies, but if not, it tells me he didn't really pay very close attention to the game. I don't expect him to know as much someone playing since Alpha 1, but I'd expect him to know and have played a bit more before he structured and spiced his article the way he did. An interesting review would have been "Prison Architect vis-a-vis the American Prison System" with "Prison Architect of course is still in Alpha" at the end of every couple of paragraphs. But it's not. And as Chris and Mark point out, his one-sided view from the American standpoint (funny because the writer isn't American and should be well aware other kinds of prisons are out there) makes for a lop-sided perspective. Then again, when it comes to social justice, much like the media, good news doesn't get written about as much as bad news.