As Americans, like to pride ourselves in our knowledge. We assume that we can find out anything at any time about any subject, so we consistently demand information. Whether we consume television news, radio broadcasts, newspapers, blogs or other online sources, we demand instant gratification in our search for the full story. With such a wide array of sources, the truth can't possibly hide. Right? Wrong. Yet we still assume that our nation's press is constantly working for the greater good and is free from the influence of our government. Unfortunately, the recent wave of arrests of journalists and an increasingly capitalistic system of journalism have led to some shortcomings in reporting.

The United States recently fell 27 places in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index to land at 47th place this year. The reason for the fall? The arrests of journalists at the Occupy Wall Street protests. Regardless of where our press ranks, the shortcomings of the media are both government and self-imposed.

Lately, the detainment of journalists has been a troubling issue. A quick Google search about police apprehending journalists and private citizens filming police officers on duty turns up plenty of results. Over-zealous police officers have been much too quick to arrest reporters who turn the camera on the officers despite the fact that those journalists pose no immediate threat. Rather, the police are worried about potential harm to their public image.

This is especially true of the journalists arrested at Occupy Wall Street protests. In an age where just about everyone has a decent camera or video camera on their phone, there is extensive footage available in these sorts of situations.

More so, news outlets like CNN and MSNBC are giving this footage a place on their network. The opportunistic citizens know that compelling footage can make the news—and so do the police. As such, they'll do whatever they can to try to stop negative footage from getting out to the public. Granted, if the police officers were doing nothing wrong, there shouldn't be an issue. Regardless, you can understand what is causing the crackdown on journalists.

The United States likes to set the example for the rest of the world in terms of civic involvement and opportunity, but our police officers are setting the example that Americans are at odds with the institution, and that institution will do anything possible to silence the truth. Occupy Wall Street conveyed as much an image of unity as it did of discord and disconnect. The common American, and especially the young American, seemed more at odds with the government and police forces than with corporations.

Police officers and the government threaten the freedom of our press, but journalists are limiting themselves as well. Looking at the relationship between news outlets and the government, so much of what dictates that relationship is access.

The government is in constant public relations mode and is careful about who they disseminate information to and under what circumstances. Certain officials may not be willing to speak to certain organizations, so when they do, the journalists involved may be overly careful to not destroy the delicate relationship.

Take the July 2003 press conference in which then-President George W. Bush announced the Iraq War. The questions were staged, pre-screened and served to convey the message of the administration. The journalists who participated knew that if the administration was to cooperate in the future, they couldn't oppose them. When a politician knows they can interact with the public through like-minded sources—a conservative can safely interview on Fox News or a liberal on MSNBC—they don't need to interact with journalists who may put their feet to the fire. This leaves many news organizations acting overly cautious to maintain the relationships they need to succeed.

With news organizations competitive for profits, those who have access to the most important figures have the greatest chance of luring the largest audiences. Some questions they're asking are scripted, barely pressing or better serving of the government than the people; just about every news organization will take viewers over journalistic integrity.

Sure, grilling a member of government about an issue will lead to an audience in the short term, but the viewers will be less likely to come back later when those guests choose to give their story to other networks. It's a catch-22 that every major news source has to deal with, but with profits becoming a larger factor in the news we receive, self-censorship has become the norm.

What journalists and government officials need to remember is that they serve the people, not the other way around. If every news source held the government to a certain standard, there would be no issue. The government can't simply avoid all media, and it wouldn't only interact with certain sources if each source maintained a certain level of journalistic integrity.

Instead, profits and competition ensure that the people will be kept in the dark when the government says so. The press is considered the "fourth estate" for a reason, and the importance of their job isn't to be overlooked. They are the protectors of a free society and vital to the success of a democracy.

What I see in our current state of journalism is an army of talented people who know what the right thing to do is but are being led astray by stockholders. The result is a press that appears to be more afraid than empowered. Police arresting journalists is bad enough, but journalists censoring themselves for revenue is even worse.