I never comment against actual press releases, because, hey, that's what they're meant for.
"Blogspam" is appropriate for literally ripped content without specific attribution; to then proceed to edit out a byline or other author credit is simple plagiarism.
Press Releases always have either an embargo date/time or "For Immediate Release" and a press contact for the originator, in my experience.
I'm not sure that's right. We see countless articles, usually originating on university websites, that are PR pieces about research studies. These get reprinted across a wide range of science-content farm sites, which tend to be pretty low quality, but I'm not sure they're copying without permission. It seems more that the system is designed to work this way.
"Blogspam" is appropriate for literally ripped content without specific attribution; to then proceed to edit out a byline or other author credit is simple plagiarism.
Press Releases always have either an embargo date/time or "For Immediate Release" and a press contact for the originator, in my experience.