How might coca-cola have responded differently when this situation first occurred, especially in terms of responding to negative perceptions among indians of coke and other mncs? (page 237) ?

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 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.