Fahrenheit 9/11 Inaccuracies

Michael Moore’s documentary has a very clear point to make. Moore will persist in asking until he gets the answer he must sense is waiting for him. For example, when he is talking to a friend of the columbine shooter, he continues asking him about why the school would have thought that he would have been likely to create violence. He asks 3 or four times to make sure that he gets the answer he is looking for. Michael Moore allows his subjects to speak, but he is the one forming the questions. Similarly, he chooses what will be shown and in what order so as to create associations and meaning from the raw images as

The idea of a documentary being an artistic or even personalised expression of a director is long gone, or so it seems in recent times. In Michael Moore’s latest documentary, Bowling for Columbine, he attempts to get across to viewers his, and essentially only his point of view, on the topic of gun laws. Although what Moore is trying to say is not necessarily wrong, he is at the same time not taking into account the other side of the argument either; all he is trying to do, essentially is hypnotise viewers into thinking

In my opinion, the documentary Fahrenhype 9/11 is a nemesis of Fahrenheit 9/11. It provides pieces of evidence that shows that Moore’s accusation that Bush did not really care about the 9/11 attacks was false. Fahrenhype 9/11 had a scene where the filmmakers defended Bush

The rationality of Americans and their tendency to believe conspiracy theories and fake news has been a talking point in media around the world. Author Kurt Andersen, shares this sentiment in his article “How America Lost Its Mind”. Andersen argues that Americans have lost their rational and critical thinking skills. Andersen constructs argument and credibility through a variety of rhetorical techniques throughout his ample connection to current events, abundant references to historical events, and bounteous references to Americans’ beliefs and dreams; lamentably, Andersen’s use of hot-button words and unbacked claims diminishes the credibility of his arguments. Andersen introduces his stance to his audience through commentary on modern-day

Our perception in regards to reality is frequently “in the hands of” of our community, and we form our beliefs in regards to what is real is through the media. Therefore, the documentary “We Need to Talk about Sandy Hook” by Sofia Small storm and the film “Wag the Dog,” by Barry Levinson are both examples of how the media tries to deceive people. The documentary has deceived the pubic into believing that the Sandy Hook Massacres did exist, and Wag the Dog tries to trick the public into believing that the United States will be at war. Both films use deceptions that are planned by the government to deceive the public for their own needs. Therefore, although people rely on media for legitimate information, they never know the truth unless it was experienced first hand.

The title of "Fahrenheit 9/11" is a play on the title of the famous Ray Bradbury novel, "Fahrenheit 451" in which society has been transformed into an authoritarian, repressive regime, in which subversive ideas are crimes and books are burned. In the book, a lonely protagonist is awakened to this reality and joins the struggle to keep underground dissidence alive.

The September 11 attacks were tragic events that had spread shockwaves of horror and grief across the United States. The tragedy became the subject of controversy as some skeptics began to doubt the details reported to have transpired that day. Some people question its legitimacy, theorizing that the Bush administration devised and orchestrated the attacks to further its agenda. Filmmaker Dylan Avery discusses and promotes this prevalent conspiracy theory in his documentary, Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup. Avery argues that the government possessed foreknowledge of the attacks by comparing them to precedents of similar situations. He challenges the official explanations and provides his analyzations of evidence from the reports and media. Avery effectively appeals to pathos, ethos, and logos in his film, but his compelling argument is ultimately undermined by fallacies.

Firstly, the “war on terror” had reduced the humanitarian concerns down, and the foreign policy. Furthermore, media coverage had become more deferential and constrained: therefore, reducing the chances of media influencing policy. The “war on terror” most importantly provided journalists with a guide in which they could understand global events and policy makers with the ability to justify a more aggressive foreign policy plan. At last, the “war on terror” had constructed an ideological bond between journalist and policy makers which created stronger media management. Techniques developed to display coverage of certain issues over others to frame stories that support official

Moore is a very well known documentary filmmaker, journalist, actor, and left wing political activist. Although, many audience members may have a preconceived idea on how credible Moore is, he does a great job in re-establishing credibility to his audience throughout the film. One example is his appearance in the film in general. Moore appears a number of times throughout his film, especially when he goes on “hunts” in other countries to de-bunk

Fahrenheit 9/11, creates many good points and provides the public with an inside look into the corruption of George Bush’s presidency and what could have possibly led to the attacks on 9/11. However, the documentary overall argument is extremely weak. It is not convincing to anyone, other than those already suspicious of Bush’s involvement in 9/11, because of the ineffective ways of argument shown throughout the film.

The media has become so powerful in today’s society that it has come to the point of controlling our daily lives. “We accept the reality of the world with which we’re represented. It’s as simple as that”. This was said by a character in the movie, The Truman Show that was released in 1998, distributed by Paramount Pictures, directed by Peter Weir, and includes stars such as Jim Carrey, Laura Linney, Natasha McElhone and many more. There is a crucial need to criticize the media in order to explore the way something is presented and to be sure that we are thinking for ourselves because the media is not always accurate in its portrayal of facts.

The obvious bias illustrated throughout Michael Moore’s film certainly does detract from the messages conveyed however when presented in the right circumstances it adds more value to the messages. The obvious bias leaves many people questioning the credibility of the director’s message as it doesn’t show the full spectrum of the situation, which is what documentaries are for, and ultimately this detracts the films message. However, in some circumstances the obvious bias brings more light on important aspects which should be acted upon thus adding more value the message being portrayed. Michael Moore has directed over 12 documentaries and a handful of them have been awarded with prestigious film awards. “Where to invade next”, “Sicko”, “Bowling for Columbine”, “Capitalism: a love story” and “Fahrenheit 9/11”, these are just half of the documentaries in which Michael Moore has directed. The purpose of a documentary is to present a nonfictional motion picture which aims to promote or

The tragic events that occurred on September 11th, 2001 will live on forever in the history of the United States as citizens shed fresh tears for those lost every year. Hundreds upon thousands of articles have been written since the life-shattering catastrophic event, most of which – unsurprisingly – focus on the politics of the entire situation. In one article, “9/11,” Susan Sontag ruthlessly criticizes the government response following the attacks, making bold claims that they were withholding information from the public and leaving citizens blind and ignorant. Though Sontag is effective in describing a valid argument against the government’s response after the events of 9/11, her success is lost in her failed establishment of ethos in her lacking appearance of knowledge, little fairness toward the government’s side, and lost credibility due to inadequate facts and strong emotions.

Michael Moore’s latest film, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” presents a critical look at the administration of George W. Bush and the War on Terrorism. In this film Moore investigates the rapid growth of the United States government and its trend of trampling the rights of individuals, and the corporatism that is spawned out of the close ties between big government and big business during wartime. Michael Moore may not convince all audiences, but is successful for its factual accuracy in which the evidence spoke for itself, and at the same time proclaimed Moore's artistry in transposing and splicing scenes to create impressions that supported his allegations and opinions. Michael Moore has employed two main techniques in an

A major issue dealt with in "Testify" is the filtering of the news media for mass consumption and the misrepresentation of world events by the media to keep the audience happy and content