Which one do you choose?

[benbenbull]

The same dramatic technological changes that have provided marketers with more (and more diverse) communications choices have also increased the risk that passionate consumers will voice their opinions in quicker, more visible, and much more damaging ways. Such hijacked media are the opposite of earned media: an asset or campaign becomes hostage to consumers, other stakeholders, or activists who make negative allegations about a brand or product. Members of social networks, for instance, are learning that they can hijack media to apply pressure on the businesses that originally created them. High-profile examples involve companies ranging from Nestlé (whose Facebook page was hijacked) to Domino’s Pizza (a prank online video of two employees contaminating sandwiches appeared on YouTube).

In each case, passionate consumers tried to persuade others to boycott products, putting the reputation of the target company at risk. When that happens, the company’s response may not be sufficiently quick or thoughtful, and the learning curve has been steep. Toyota Motor, for example, mitigated some of the damage from its recall crisis earlier this year with a relatively quick and well-orchestrated social-media response campaign, which included efforts to engage with consumers directly on sites such as Twitter and the social-news site Digg.

34. Toyota Motor’s experience is cited as an example of
[A] responding effectively to hijacked media.
[B] persuading customers into boycotting products.
[C] cooperating with supportive consumers.
[D] taking advantage of hijacked media.

Many thanks!

[the Consultant]

I didn't read it, it's too much... but I like the letter B

glad I could help

[Robbie H]

I say [C] tentatively
Their issue was not hijacked media - it was faulty design/production.
They weren't persuading anyone to boycott products.
They weren't dealing with hijacked media.

Maybe I'm missing something.