A、Massachusetts. B、Texas. C、California. D、Connecticut. C浏览选项可知，本题与美国州名有关。根据短文可知，California(又称Golden State)率先抵制不属实的环保声明，故答案为[C]。

Over the past decade, the environmental movement has exploded onto the minds of mainstream consumers, a fact not lost on marketers and advertisers. Green advertising started in the mid-1980s when issues of the environment muscled their way to the forefront of marketing. Advertisers saw the consumer desire for environmentally safe products and tried to meet the demand as quickly as possible. Not surprisingly, the first wave suffered from rough and poorly-conceived marketing efforts. Many advertisers embraced a genuine concern for the envi-
ronment. But consumers realized that some companies made false claims and exploited the movement, using such ambiguous terms as "environmentally friendly" and "green". Consumers grew wary of environmental appeals, and advertisers reacted by reducing its emphasis. In 1992 the Federal Trade Commission established guidelines for green marketing, followed shortly by state governments. California passed particularly strict laws, setting definitions for terms like "ozone friendly", "biodegradable", and "recycled". According to the state’s court, "California seeks to guard against potentially inaccurate claims or ecological boost about products with minimal environmental attributes." Texas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Tennessee, Connecticut, and Washington soon followed the Golden State’s lead. The rigid regulations have left a number of advertisers confused and frustrated, although some feel that environmental claims have already peaked and are on their way out. Some believe that we’ve now entered green advertising’s third wave, during which environmental concern is part of the mainstream, too.
Questions 29 to 32 are based on the passage you have just heard.
29. What was the problem with green advertisements in early times?
30. What was the response by consumers to the early green advertisements?
31. What is said about advertisements after the first wave?
32. Which state took the lead in guarding inaccurate environmental claims?