What is 'Security Theater'
This first decade of the 21st century has seen a lot of change for most Americans. Our beliefs about security, freedom, privacy, and justice have almost certainly been affected to some degree. A growing voice of criticism has arisen around how governments have responded to the changes of the last 7 years, punctuated by 9-11-2001; in fact it has become vogue to criticize endeavors to increase security if they aren't totally passive and non-invasive or perfectly successful in every way.
The phrase "Security Theater" is commonly used to describe many of the efforts undertaken in response to threats (real or perceived); it refers to things that try to make us feel more secure, but provide little or no increase in actual security. It is the modern day equivalent of the cardboard cutout of a police officer that one puts behind the counter of a convenience store after hours.
However, not every program or measure that inconveniences us without also providing immediate, drastic and incontrovertible results is Security Theater. Sometimes the effectiveness of a program is not so easily calculated, especially when the outside observer does not have all of the information.
Take for example how some retailers station uniformed security officers (or even extra-duty uniformed law enforcement officers) at the entrance, or wandering the floor, of their businesses. These uniforms are highly visible, which means they do not catch many shoplifters in the act. They do prevent an unknown amount of theft simply through presence, and during the holiday season when registers may have much more cash on hand, they discourage robbery as well. In addition, while uniformed guards do not pose much of an inconvenience (well, except to would-be shoplifters or robbers), they can evoke certain feelings in shoppers that may or may not reflect positively on the shopping experience (this is the marketing and P.R. part of the post); some folks are ok with cops and guards, some folks are not. I am sure Freud had something to say on the subject.
In reality, the loss prevention team is much more effective at catching shoplifters and stopping shrinkage; these are the folks who are not in uniform. They usually look like regular customers and do a lot of watching...video camera monitors, people on the sales floor, known areas of low visibility, etc. The uniformed guards may not be too expensive, but the extra-duty law enforcement almost certainly are; it varies by location and agency, but these shifts can pay as much as normal wages for the officer (while not great pay, it is certainly more than a security guard.) Therefore, the return on the costs associated with these solutions is out of balance. Loss Prevention certainly saves the store more money by keeping shrinkage down, catching (and hopefully pursuing prosecution of) shoplifters, but uniforms keep the kids and casual shoplifters on their toes and probably discourage the occasional disturbance. The real advantage of uniforms is the deterrent to robbers and casual or low level shoplifters. The pro's (yes they exist; their M.O. is to steal high value items and return them for cash, or sell them through pawn shops or eBay type venues.) and the insiders cost the company far more in losses than kids stealing video games or casual thrill seeking lingerie thieves.
Does this mean my description of uniformed presence in retail locations is Security Theater? Not necessarily. One can easily argue that it is not a cost effective solution to have extra-duty law enforcement (which could cost two or three times more than private security, I'd imagine), but that is a management decision for the business in question, is it not? There is a value in having the uniformed presence, unquantifiable as it may be to the outsider.
The professional security industry has long used methods that could easily be interpreted as "Security Theater", but in reality are tried and true methods of meeting the needs presented to the security organization. It is easy to criticize such methods if we do not have the expert's insight; not every guard is always positioned to provide maximum protection of goods and persons. Sometimes, measures are enacted to provide a feeling of safety when the resulting security does not increase significantly. And sometimes they are put there to remove the appearance of inaction or ineffective delivery. Hopefully, we can learn to more effectively discern between the two.
