A Rhetorical Analysis of 911: In Plane Sight

Everyone undoubtedly remembers the horrific events that took place on September 11, 2001, in New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C. According to the information given to the American people through the media, the events that occurred that day were acts of terrorism. However, there are some that question the incidents of September 11th, and some even say that it was an act of conspiracy. One of these people who believe that the disasters of that day were methodically planned by the government is the director of 911: In Plane Sight, William Lewis. Lewis effectively uses techniques such as dramatism, continuity/discontinuity, and reflection/selection/deflection to sway the viewer into believing that the incidents of September 11th were purposely orchestrated and carried out by the United States government.

911: In Plane Sight has one obvious goal in its presentation, and that is to persuade the audience into believing a government conspiracy. The use of language is a major player in the film’s persuasive techniques along with visual images, sound effects, and eyewitness testimonies and accounts. While the director presents logical facts in the documentary, he peppers these facts with emotional images and video footage in order to further his cause for others to believe what is being presented.

Not only does the documentary’s director want to stir the viewer’s emotions, he also wants them to feel as if they have been deceived. The viewer must walk away feeling betrayed, angry, defiant, and skeptical about the government, according to the director. More than anything, the goal of this film’s director is to get the viewer on his side.

Lewis uses dramatism in 911: In Plane Sight to make the viewer believe that what occurred on September 11th was part of a government conspiracy. Kenneth Burke summarizes dramatism as “a technique of analysis of language and thought as basically modes of action rather than a means of conveying information” (54).

The goal of the director is to lead the viewer into believing his point of view by using images and language as a form of persuasion rather than relying on a simple conveyance of facts regarding the events of 9/11. In the documentary, the director uses language a great deal in his attempt to persuade the audience. The symbolic action of the dramatism is used to garner an emotional response to even the most straightforward facts.

The tone of the narrator’s voice is another way that this film attempts to persuade the audience. When the narrator talks about the government and conspiracies in general, his tone has a looming, deep, and almost diabolical sound. The viewer can sense simply from the tone of his voice that he believes the government is bad, and that we should believe it too. At other times, the narrator’s tone of voice is mocking, such as when he is quoting the government or George Bush. His voice is high-pitched, and it sounds as if he is quoting a cartoon character or a clown.

The narrator uses the word “conspiracy” a lot in the film, and this is probably not by accident. He also says that the American people have been “deceived” and “lied to” by the United States government and mainstream media. These are strong words to use as a method of persuasion. Of course, no one likes to be deceived, and just that very word itself implies something terrible has happened and possibly someone, or a group of people, was affected.

The word “supposed” is also used quite a lot in this documentary. For instance, the narrator says, “Let’s take a look at the supposed events of September 11th” (Lewis). While these words sound subtle, they have a huge meaning. Labeling something as “supposed” means that there is serious doubt that it is true, especially when the evidence proves otherwise.

Lewis wants his viewers to feel as if they have been duped by the government. He wants them to feel as if all of these actions were carried out right under the noses of the American people. He wants the viewer to want to scold the government for lying, and send it to its room. Lewis also wants the audience to question authority and the government’s actions. When he wants you to think, the narrator simply blurts “question” to precede his probing thought. This film wants the audience to “question” quite a bit of information.

The narrator blatantly says that the cause of the crash of United Airlines Flight 93 in Pennsylvania “was NOT a terrorist with a box cutter” (Lewis). He states this matter-of-factly, as if he knows it to be completely and utterly true. And as a result, the audience is supposed to think the same thing. Lewis seems awfully sure in this film at times, and although he presents evidence, his words are a tool for persuasion, which is just as important as physical proof. Or at least that is what the audience is supposed to believe.

The director also uses the technique of continuity/discontinuity to persuade the viewer to feel contempt for the government. Burke notes that this technique is used quite frequently in politics: But often such divisiveness (or discontinuity) can be healed when the warring factions join in a common cause against an alien enemy (the division elsewhere thus serving to reestablish the principle of continuity at home). It should be apparent how either situation sets up the conditions for its particular kind of scapegoat, as a device that unifies all those who share the same enemy. (51)

It seems that Lewis wants the audience to unite, to band together and fight this imaginary boogey monster that the government has created. Just like President Bush wanted the country to band together and share the same enemy, so does Lewis.

Lewis uses Burke’s reflection/selection/deflection technique in the film in order to get the viewer to feel a certain way. According to Burke, language reflects reality, and it also helps to select reality and deflect it. In the documentary, Lewis uses language and tone to show the viewer what really happened on that day in September according to the reality that he has selected to believe. For those that think that the government did not conspire to make 9/11 happen, Lewis strives to deflect reality.

It is interesting to note the way music is used in 911: In Plane Sight. The scenes of the planes crashing into the twin towers are accompanied by music that could very well belong in a horror film. The music is tense and creates a looming sense that something is out get the viewer, and that something could very well be the government. There is also a sense of urgency in the music. It seems to suggest running far away from the notion that the incidents of 9/11 were caused by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist regime.

Sound is also used as an exaggeration of sorts by the director in a scene from the film. When the firefighters are recalling the collapse of the floors in the World Trade Center, there are accompanying sound effects that mimic a collapsing building. The caption during this scene reads “Sound effects added for illustration only.” This clearly shows how sound can be used to persuade someone to believe something to be true.

The documentary makes it a point to distinguish between a conspiracy theory and an actual conspiracy. The director wants the viewer to know that the information they are presenting proves the theory of a conspiracy, and so, therefore, the incidents on September 11th were part of a government conspiracy, plain and simple. The film makes a point to focus on the word “conspiracy” by itself without the theory attached to it. According to the narrator, if there is evidence, there is no longer a theory present because the conspiracy has been proven. Therefore, this film wants the viewer to believe that the conspiracy is true without a shadow of a doubt.

The title of the film is a pun of words, and the narrator uses the term “in ‘plane’ sight” more than once. At one point, he states “Sometimes the best way to hide something is in plain sight” (Lewis). Of course, he is referring to the government cover up of September 11th. In other words, sometimes the lies are right under our noses.

911: In Plane Sight does make a strong case and the film’s collection of evidence is rather impressive. But it also makes no counter arguments. Would this film have the same impact without the use of techniques to persuade the viewer into believing the conspiracy? It probably would not. However, if the film had presented the information without the use of persuasive language, images, and music, it might have a different result. One thing is for sure, and that is that this film is definitely a planned attempt to influence how we as Americans view the government, and the vision is definitely not a good one.

Works Cited

911: In Plane Sight. Dir. William Lewis. BridgeStoneMediaGroup.com, 2004.

Burke, Kenneth. "Terministic Screens." Language as symbolic action: essays on life, literature, and method. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966, pp. 45-62.