Answer:
Organizations are responding to social media complaints using all of the methods indicated. This provides more tools to avoid any type of repercussions.
Explanation:
- Adding non-disparagement clauses in consumer contracts. When someone downloads an app, a user must accept an agreement, sometimes so extense and complicated, that the user will just click <em>Accept</em>. T<u>hese agreements or contracts could include protections</u> so costumers don't speak negatively about a company.
- Increasing the legal staff in the organization. In the case of legal actions, the best protection is to have several attorneys<em> preparing documentation in advance</em> and <u>receiving notification of all potential complaints from community managers</u>.
- Zeroing in one statement that is not true and ignoring the rest. The community manager can take action reducing importance to any complaint created by a consumer, and disregard all related comments. This will make appear the <em>complaint as something unfounded </em>and will lose importance to the eyes of other consumers.
- Deleting unfriendly posts. The most aggressive form of control, and the one that could affect the corporative image the most. Since customers are denouncing something that feels is affecting them directly, the deletion of this complain could be seen as censorship, and tyrannic. Even though the company <u>could set rules</u> to avoid discrimination and violence on their social networks, a comment sent to get help about a situation that affects a customer directly is not correct from a <em>marketing or public relations stand.</em>
<span>The reason was because "they were colonies of Great Britain and
they fought on the side of the allies"</span>.
The English Empire included the domains, colonies, provinces,
orders and different regions managed or controlled by the United Kingdom and
its ancestor states. It began with the abroad possessions and exchanging posts
built up by Britain between the late sixteenth and mid eighteenth hundreds of
years.
Answer:
C) the presence of mold is a material adverse fact and could affect the health of the person(s) occupying the house.
Explanation:
In the given scenario the presence of the mold in the house can affect the health of the buyer so it needs to be disclosed to him. It is a material adverse fact.
According to the Alabama law the seller and agent are required to disclose any material defects the buyer who will know make the final decision.
So the agent should tell the seller that the presence of mold is a material adverse fact and could affect the health of the person(s) occupying the house.
Mi material Es musical so no que no me salio