While business social initiatives might been maybe not that effective as a marketing bonus, reputational damage can cost businesses a great deal.

Market sentiment is mostly about the overall attitude of investor and investors towards specific securities or markets. In the previous decade this has become increasingly also influenced by the court of public opinion. Individuals are more aware of ofcorporate behaviour than previously, and social media platforms enable allegations to spread in no time whether they truly are factual, deceptive and even slanderous. Thus, aware consumers, viral social media campaigns, and public perception can translate into diminished sales, declining stock prices, and inflict harm to a company's brand equity. In contrast, years ago, market sentiment was only determined by financial indicators, such as for example product sales figures, earnings, and economic factors that is to say, fiscal and monetary policies. But, the proliferation of social media platforms and the democratisation of data have certainly widened the scope of what market sentiment involves. Needless to say, consumers, unlike any period before, are wielding plenty of power to influence stock rates and impact a company's monetary performance through social media organisations and boycott plans based on their understanding of a company's conduct or standards.

The evidence is obvious: neglecting human rightsissues might have significant costs for companies and states. Governments and businesses which have successfully aligned with ethical practices avoid reputation damage. Applying stringent ethical supply chain practices,encouraging fair labour conditions, and aligning regulations with international business standards on human rights will protect the trustworthiness of countries and affiliated companies. Furthermore, present reforms, for example in Oman Human rights and Ras Al Khaimah human rights exemplify the international increased exposure of ESG considerations, be it in governance or business.

Investors and stockholder are more worried about the impact of non-favourable press on market sentiment than some other facets nowadays simply because they recognise its immediate link to overall company success. Although the relationship between corporate social responsibility campaigns and policies on consumer behaviour indicates a weak relationship, the data does in fact show that multinational corporations and governments have actually faced some financialdamages and backlash from consumers and investors due to human rights concerns. The way in which clients view ESG initiatives is frequently as being a bonus rather than a determining factor. This difference in priorities is clear in consumer behaviour studies in which the impact of ESG initiatives on buying decisions remains fairly low when compared with price, level of quality and convenience. Having said that, non-favourable press, or especially social media when it highlights business wrongdoing or human rights associated issues has a strong impact on customers behaviours. Customers are more likely to respond to a company's actions that clashes with their personal values or social expectations because such stories trigger a psychological reaction. Hence, we see government authorities and companies, such as for example in the Bahrain Human rights reforms, are proactively implementing precautions to weather the storms before suffering reputational damages.