The most interesting rhetorical device used in the documentary, I think, is the parallelism drawn between the current Wikileaks story and the past Pentagon Papers story. This really shows how print media is becoming more and more obsolete. With the Pentagon Papers, the NYT was one of the only ways these papers could become public, so the story itself relied on the newspaper. With Wikileaks, the internet allowed the Afghan war videos to become news on their own. As one of the editors said, "The Pentagon Papers needed us; Wikileaks didn't need us."
Since we didn't see the full film, I'm not entirely sure what it is arguing, but I assume it's that print media is becoming more and more obsolete. I would be interested to see how the film documents the counterarguments for this. I myself have always been a fan of print media; I almost romanticize the idea. It's just such a historic medium. And I feel I can trust print media, especially the NYT (despite Judith Miller), more than online news. I can trust a blogger for their commentary on issues, but not for the facts.