The people votes for members that are put in leadership positions in congress
<span>As indicated
by the article, Coca-Cola did not react quickly enough to alleviate and pacify
its purchasers that its Coke items are harmless and lawful. As indicated by
Coke's </span>social
responsibility commitments, the assertions of legislators spread quickly through India.
Nonetheless, the organization neglected to acknowledge how quick news went to.
Rather than looking to recover the trust and support from its clients, Coke
concentrated excessively on different workarounds. Coca-Cola shaped advisory groups
in India and the US. The advisory groups invested energy to run the tests, besides;
Coke was quiet to its shoppers. As specified by Mr. Seth, Coke's Indian
advertising expert, in the Indian culture, "Here individuals translate silence
as crime". Buyers needed to hear the official clarification from Coca-Cola
instantly and they would not like to hold up later. At long last, Coca-Cola
safeguarded their organization by claiming that different organizations have
comparative issues like Coke.
Answer: false their are limits
Explanation: Basic Constitutional Rights in the United States. ... But no rights are absolute. Government has the power to limit individuals' freedom under certain circumstances, like when they've committed a crime. And the First Amendment doesn't protect some speech, such as violent threats.
