I think even to draw her attention to the discrepancies between reality and how Amiga, Inc. describes itself at amiga.com, in PR releases and in talking to the Kent people would be a good start.
Bill McEwen claims the current company is the same that produced the Commodore Amiga, for starters. Does buying/licensing the brand name and other IP really allow him to truthfully say "the company that did all that in the early days of computing and video is us"?
And it'd be great if somebody asked him to specify how exactly his company is the "world's premier provider of multimedia enabling technologies." I can't see a single product or service that even puts Amiga, Inc. in that market, let alone makes it the marker leader.
I think these are concepts that even a general reporter would be able to understand and communicate to readers. Then there are the asset shifts and failures to comply with court mandates and so on -- which took place in part right there in Washington state -- that would be a rich area to mine, but would take quite a bit of research to get up to speed on. I imagine the highlights could be conveyed, though, along with pointers to references.
One thing I'm curious about is how the Kent team (and their lawyers) missed the obvious fallacies. Didn't anyone think to pose the natural follow-up questions to Bill McEwen, "Oh, what would be an example of your multimedia enabling technologies? Where can I read up on them or see them in action?" Bill McEwen must have been very happy and relieved that no request for a demonstration was made. Seems to me these people simply didn't want to look a gift horse in the mouth and so quietly accepted every claim at face value, probably in order to show state lawmakers and so on this big, important tech company getting on board (and paying twice the expected amount for naming rights) and thus build momentum toward the final approval of the arena.
Even a casual glance at Amiga, Inc.'s visible presence would immediately raise doubts about McEwen's claims. Clearly it was in the best interests of the Kent center project to not even glance casually or, if they did, to keep their observations to themselves.
-- gary_c
