Final answer:
The scenario not suitable for a Content Delivery Network (CDN) is B. a family history website with very few annual visitors, as the benefits of a CDN would not justify the costs for such a website with minimal and localized traffic.
Step-by-step explanation:
The scenario not suitable for a Content Delivery Network (CDN) is: B) A family history website with only a few visitors annually. CDNs are designed to optimize the delivery of content to a geographically dispersed audience. They provide multiple benefits, including reduced latency, increased reliability, and better handling of traffic spikes.
A small construction company in the US (A) might not have a large audience but could benefit from a CDN if the content is media-rich or if they plan to expand their reach. Similarly, a global retail company (C) with customers across continents would greatly benefit from a CDN to ensure fast and reliable access to their website. A global media website (D) would definitely require a CDN to manage the delivery of content to a diverse, multilingual audience efficiently.
However, a family history website with minimal traffic doesn't need the distribution advantages of a CDN. The cost and complexity of a CDN wouldn't be justified for such a site, given that the primary visitors are likely few and possibly regionally localized.