A company, Blue Marbles, who has a presence on Interwebs has become actively involved in political campaigns and uses their profile to make claims about federal and state political candidates- both positive and negative- as well as taking a stance on political issues and advocating for particular political parties. Blue Marbles has over 20 million followers and their political messages, if paid for, would far exceed the limits allowed by campaign finance laws. Days before the most recent election, Blue Marbles continued to post political content to its page. However, Blue Marbles never gave money directly to any candidate or political party. Is this permissible corporate political speech

This would be considered permissible corporate political speech.  

Explanation:

In Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court basically eliminated any limits on how much money corporations can spend in order to support or attack political candidates. Citizens United is a nonprofit organization that spent a lot of money supporting candidates, what we currently know as a Super PAC. Super PAC's do not have a limit on how much money they can collect and spend supporting candidates. As long as Blue Marbles doesn't coordinate their activities with any political candidate, they are allowed to support or attack anyone.

answer; i believe that the correct answer is (d); the business benefits because owners can share responsibilities;

answer; (a) searching for information can be done quickly;