I'll see your $.02 and raise you a few bucks
It's certainly true that some journalists are tring to kill EVs. The idiot children at Top Gear are the most egregrious example, having repeatedly faked EV problems for "fun", but that's because they're addicted to the rumble of controlled explosions and the stink of petrochemicals - as noted, idiots, and in fairness they do seem to know it.
But beyond that kind of nonsense, there does seem to be a pattern of corporate media types trashing perfectly capable EVs. When even the New York Times gets in the game, you do have to wonder if there isn't some broader problem (btw, if you missed the whole Broder-Tesla dustup, go check that out; also read my reply as vike1108 to this PlugInCars column, where I take issue with the writer's claim that the NYT stood by Broder's Tesla review - they didn't).
I think a meme is settling in that EVs are a dead end, driven by PHEV/BEV sales falling short of rosy projections, ignorant and/or insufficiently prepared reviewers, and perhaps a bit of the Red vs. Blue disease that has corrupted nearly every policy discussion these days (a personal automotive solution that sticks it to OPEC by exploiting domestic energy resources while keeping us off bicycles and buses having somehow become a "Blue Camp" idea). That last point was probably a contributing factor in the spectacular stranding of a Nissan Leaf documented in the Wall Street Journal, a newspaper of the "Red Camp" [sigh].
Now sure, given the current state of the art, EVs aren't for everyone, or even most people (Ed Begley Jr.'s enthusiastic boosterism notwithstanding). For their part, manufacturers (with the possible exception of Mitsubishi, who's had other problems) missed the market sweet spot by over-equipping and over-pricing their offerings. Turns out the intersection of treehuggers, techie geeks, and customers for $40k small cars wasn't as large as they'd hoped - whoops. And government incentives have been badly misdirected, withholding assistance from less affluent buyers who might have been able to easily afford an i-MiEV ES if they'd been given a $7500 rebate on the spot instead of a tax credit they're not "qualified" to use (a great euphemism for "you don't make enough money for us to help you").
While all that's added up to less than stellar success, it's not proof that EVs won't work. I think some ideas that are casually tossed around are rooted in ignorance, e.g., thinking that EVs won't be practical until we have a $20k EV with 200 mile range and room for a family of five that can be recharged in under 10 minutes from chargers installed at every intersection. While EVs are practical right now for many potential customers, we need to be clear-eyed about the special characteristics of EVs and stop judging them by ICE standards. Stop fretting about "infrastructure" when we already have access to the best energy infrastructure in the country - the electrical grid; exploiting that only requires that we change our way of thinking about refueling. Stop whining about the challenges of cross-country driving with EVs - unless you're moseying along seeing the sights at less than 100 miles a day (even less if you can't chart a course with appropriate Level 2 charging opportunities), the EV is not the right choice for leaving town, all the high-pitched whining from EV extremophiles to the contrary (affluent Tesla owners excepted). Stop expanding the universe of potential EV customers by including everyone who has a round-trip commute within the EPA listed range - we all know that range is subject to many variables, but we're also a bit dodgy about the fact that it's also only valid for a new car, and will only diminish over time.
Instead, there's a lot that could be done with what we actually have at hand. The virtuous circle of less weight->smaller battery->less weight driving to lower cost (we hope) means that the i-MiEV got it right, and so might the SparkEV, MiniE, Fiat 500e, SmartED, or Scion iQEV (and people make fun of i-MiEV?) if given some real engineering and marketing support. If Honda were really serious about EVs, I think a great starting point would be an update of the Gen-1 Insight, with the low mass and aerodynamics needed to be more versatile than the current generation of urban runabouts (and to Leaf and Focus-E fans that insist they don't fit that description because an extra 15 miles of range is a game changer, GET OVER YOURSELVES).
EVs aren't perfect, but they are clearly better vehicles at a better value than they have ever been before. I think government incentives, especially if they're restructured to help all buyers instead of just the more affluent, do make sense if they help us get to economies of scale that render those incentives unnecessary. Hopefully, once we're there, EVs will be beyond the reach of the naysayers and can carve out a sustainable market niche for buyers whose needs match up with the technology.