What moore does is touch on (with kid-gloves) the interrelation of these things. He doesn't pose poignant questions, he makes empty-handed guestures which appropriate the more rigorous discipline espoused by individuals like Chomsky, Said, Herman, Zinn, and others. He is a leftie everyman who leeches the substance of their arguments and then tosses it into a film (as mentioned, a very poorly done film). Giving credit to him for the substance of the film is in ignorance of a great history of intellectual dissent. He bearly even understands dissent, as evidenced in his ridiculously weak dialogue with those interviewed ("why is this so", asks Moore? "I dont know." Moore replies, "I dont know either" etc.) and his waffling stance overall, which is predicated on his fear of actually SAYING or MAKING tight logical correlations between trends.
Lefties need to quit dick riding this man simply because he is a leftie. His material sucks and his creativity is nil (note the cheesy fifties archetype appropriated wholesale which he feebly attempts to pass off as satire). What we learn from him is how dangerous a feeble mind can be to the cause of the leftwing. Serious intellectuals only need laugh at the incompleteness of nearly everything he says or produces. Sentiment does not garner respect, and thats something that Moore needs to learn.