the station and produced two reports on “fire-smoke-control system” at the arena that aired on December 16, 2006 and May 17, 2007. Mr. Snepp had previously produced an award winning program which exposed “potentially disastrous environmental features” which threatened the safety of the Playa Vista development in Los Angeles. Mr. Snepp stated the promotional segment described in paragraph 9 of the first complaint aired between December 15 through 18, 2006. Prior to the broadcasts, Mr. Snepp submitted multiple Public Record Act requests to the city‟s building and safety and fire departments. Mr. Snepp reviewed “„Log #27‟” which was executed by representatives of both the building and safety and fire departments. According to Mr. Snepp, the document, Log #27, dated January 28, 1998, set forth the requirements and proceduresout?‟” The piece ends with a graphic that shows the report‟s title, and the date and time of its airing.” Mr. Hollyn then analyzed each portion of the promotional segment and editing techniques utilized by defendants. Dr. Edward Finnegan is a linguistics professor at the University of Southern California. Dr. Finnegan systematically analyzed the language used in the December 19, 2006 broadcast. Dr. Finnegan concluded: “[T]he special news segment about [the arena] that was broadcast on December 19, 2006 . . . conveys a strong and unmistakable impression that [the arena] has had and continues to have fire safety problems that endanger the lives of patrons who enter the building. That message is articulated in various ways in the content of the broadcast as it is linguistically introduced,