Over the last few weeks I have seen a number of posts discussing who will own social media.

A few of the opinions I have seen:

“Advertising will own social media (because they can sell sex– God help us all)!”
“Digital marketing agencies should own social media (because PR agencies are all about controlling the message, and ad firms have trouble integrating interactive)!”
“I’m a PR guy but would rather create a new C-level executive, the Chief Reputation Officer!”

Yes, Topaz is a PR agency, so of course we think PR will rule all, while advertising clings to creepy 30-second TV spots and marketing creates messes for PR people to clean up when they should be finding ways to make their sales forces make their good work stand up.

Who will own social media? It really depends on the organization, and the goals. If a social media effort is for branding, then perhaps advertising has a hand in it. If they are communicating messages (ahem, “relating to the public”), then perhaps PR is the lead. If lead generation is the main goal, maybe it’s marketing.

I agree with Shel Holtz; the concept of “ownership” of social media is absurd (I’m so glad I can say that without being called a Communist). It’s a combination of all the MarComm/Advertising groups that make social media work, depending on the goals.

But if you need to make a decision, give PR the keys to the car and let us drive first

Yes I’m oversimplifying. This is a snack-sized post after all.