Like what would a hypothetical press release for the release of the Xbox 360 that isn’t an ad look like?
I think you've lost sight of what we're discussing.
We're not discussing the morality of press releases, what we're discussing is a THIRD PARTY media organization reading from a script and re-showing video footage sent to them from a company without declaring that they're doing so. It is the repetition without source-context that is the sin, not the original company's media publications.
So are Microsoft's press releases about the XBox 360 ads? Yes. Is that wrong? Absolutely not. The "wrong" is a different media company taking that content and repeating it verbatim without declaration or contextualization (e.g. quotation marks).
If money (or other benefits) changed hands between the company benefiting and the media company reporting, that only compounds the immorality of it.
Using the term "press release" like it is some kind of legal shield is non sequitur. It doesn't matter if the ad is a billboard, graphic, sidewalk spinner, or press release it is still an advert designed to promote Amazon, and an undisclosed one at that.
If a YouTuber wasn't required to declare it, that would be wrong too.