...worked as a critic for the New York Press in the late '90s/early '00s while co-running Roebling Hall gallery.
Was hired as a critic by Village Voice, then unhired in 2008 because he was also working as a director for two art fairs.
The difference between then and now was there were no bloggers looking over the magazine's shoulder and complaining 8 years ago.
Whether CVF has a "conflict" depends on how seriously you take the money side of art*, or value the "one way" nature of traditional mainstream media.
Tyler Green, the blogger who brought CVF low, is really into both.
If CVF was a blogger with comments enabled his "conflict" would matter less because his biases could be called out and discussed.
Up till now art criticism has been like blogging--people looked the other way about "conflicts" because there are so few talented writers and criticism doesn't pay a living wage except to a few staffers of dailies.
I guess art is mature now.
Disclosure: In the New York Press Viveros-Faune wrote supportively about my work and a show I co-curated when the Voice and other publications failed to bite. I certainly didn't begrudge him his "conflict" at that time.
*Years ago, shortly after I moved here, I attended a panel discussion of New York art writers at Matthew Marks gallery. Afterwards I asked an Art in America writer on the panel, who I knew, why they kept the topics to vague generalities and didn't mention any artists by name. "Oh, we can't do that," she said. "Why?" I said. "Because if we do that collectors will run out and buy those artists." I pretty much stopped going to panels after that.