Andy_Langton - 4:09 pm on Feb 21, 2013 (gmt 0)
To reiterate something that martinibuster is saying, I don't believe there is any "special" handling of PRWeb or any of the other PR distribution sites. Why would there need to be?
Let's say a PR site adds 1000 new releases a day, on average. That's more than a 1/4 million new pages every year. Even looking at it in a very basic way, any site seeking to maintain value across a new 1/4 million pages every year is going to need to be creating a *lot* of external value to support those pages. Worst still, that site needs to find a way to link to those pages internally to pass value. They can't really do that, so new releases get the most benefit, and older releases diminish over time.
So a press release site that merely publishes a release which gets no external benefit at all is going to be providing a very weak link that gets worse as it ages.
The same logic applies to direct distribution partners. If they simply republish everything that a PR site puts out, they have exactly the same problem.
It's not against guidelines (you pay for PR distribution) and it's not a "bad link" for some special reason that relates to PR sites. But if you expect any significant link value just from the PR site and its direct distributors, you're likely to be disappointed.