Description
Security professionals have varying degrees of public accountability – public security professionals such as the police are more exposed to public views, whereas private security professionals seemingly have little incentive or reason to abide by or take account of what the public thinks. Yet both public and private security professionals occupy vital roles in security governance, making important decisions about how security practices like counterterrorism are actually delivered. How do these “street level bureaucrats” (Lipsky 1980) understand what the public wants and do they respond to such views? Through in-depth qualitative interviews with both public and private security professionals, the paper contends that both groups do respond to public views. The incentives are differently aligned, with public officials thinking about public views through the lens of legitimacy; whereas private sector security professionals view public opinion as important to “brand identity” and broader business models. However, in viewing public opinion as important, security professionals also engage in processes of shaping the very public opinion which they consider to be important. Thus, they are active participants in the politics of public opinion around security issues and politics.
Keywords: security, counterterrorism, private security, public opinion
