This conversation gradually drifted to capitalism and eventually the documentary showcased by Micheal Moore. In this there was usage of Lassiez faire, neo liberalism concepts. The economic aspects of the documentary were discussed along with the current conditions in the world. This was the contextual conditions and also specific words were used to elucidate opinions. Utterance of the speakers was made based on this aspect. Initially one student declared or used the declarative notion of the speech to indicate that they believed that capitalism or the current strategy of capitalism should be changed. They declared that this form of market values would cause the markets to suffer and the mankind to suffer. This student basically stated that Michael Moore is an American documentary filmmaker. Who also is a renowned screenwriter, author and a journalist, He has also acted or taken part in the film making process. He is a liberal who has leftist wing political agenda. The content of Moore’s work generally criticizes the detrimental effects of globalization, neoliberalism and how the military powers are misused in the democratic nations. The student seemed to agree with all the views of Moore and the other students maintained stoic silence about this notion. Initial responses were representative by the other members. One student chimed in that can cause a large impact to the society.
It was said by the student that many ways this documentary serves as medium that wants to shock and expose the people about various issues. This is primarily an interpretation of how Micheal Moore and his left wing agenda. Moore is considered to be a very influential film maker who has caused profound impact on the society both positively and negatively. He has been voted by Time magazine as an influential writer. But the student said this was not the reason to believe whatever he states about economy. While making these talking points the other student seem to be taking a directive stand and said that they want to stop this viewpoint. Immediately the first participant who started the conversation tool a combustive stand about the conversation and stated that they can prove capitalism is bad for the society. There was intensive expressiveness and vehemence that was found in the tone. It was found that the first participant wanted to express their emotions behind this notion and there was a talk about how this can be detrimental to the economy. There was reference from the documentary and also discussion about the benefits of capitalism in this speech (Auramäki, Lehtinen, & Lyytinen, 1988). This was interesting as all dimensions of speech could be observed in this case study analysis.