QUES: The Grands Magasins Dufayel was a huge department store with inexpensive prices built in 1890 in the northern part of Paris, where it reached a very large new customer base in the working class. In a neighborhood with few public spaces, it provided a consumer version of the public square. It educated workers to approach shopping as an exciting social activity not just a routine exercise in obtaining necessities, just as the bourgeoisie did at the famous department stores in the central city. Like the bourgeois stores, it helped transform consumption from a business transaction into a direct relationship between consumer and sought-after goods. Its advertisements promised the opportunity to participate in the newest, most fashionable consumerism at reasonable cost. The latest technology was featured, such as cinemas and exhibits of inventions like X-ray machines (that could be used to fit shoes) and the gramophone.

What were employees taught that made a shopping experience the same?
What is the answer?
ANS: unanswerable
QUES: Many nonprofit organizations find it difficult to create consistent messaging that resonates with their various stakeholders as marketing budgets are minimal or nonexistent. Marketing is in many cases a taboo word that NPOs or others don't like to associate with such community benefit organizations. There are strategic ways in which nonprofits can leverage their access to various community stakeholders to get their name and cause recognized by the public, but it is imperative to have an outreach strategy which includes a financial plan to execute that outreach/marketing strategy, particularly if the organization has plans to rebrand or expand their initiaives.

What kind of marketing budgets do NPOs usually have?
What is the answer?
ANS: minimal or nonexistent
QUES: Modern Nationalism, as developed especially since the French Revolution, has made the distinction between "language" and "dialect" an issue of great political importance. A group speaking a separate "language" is often seen as having a greater claim to being a separate "people", and thus to be more deserving of its own independent state, while a group speaking a "dialect" tends to be seen not as "a people" in its own right, but as a sub-group, part of a bigger people, which must content itself with regional autonomy.[citation needed] The distinction between language and dialect is thus inevitably made at least as much on a political basis as on a linguistic one, and can lead to great political controversy, or even armed conflict.

What can the distinction between regional autonomy and dialect lead to?
What is the answer?
ANS:
unanswerable