The Obama administration may be a boon for technology, but new regulatory groups could usher in major changes for interactive. Here's how the industry can control its own fate.

With so many pundits predicting with great certainty what an Obama administration will bring to our lives in so many facets, I have thought about this comment often. In the world of media and marketing, speculation is rife with assumptions that the era of "marketer free ride" is about to come to an end.

In a deficit-ridden nation, will a mandate-elected president and a possibly filibuster-proof Senate allow corporations to deduct advertising expenses? In an era where regulation is "in," will the FTC, FCC and FDA, with increased authorities, not want to make their marks? Only the U.S. and New Zealand allow direct-to-consumer advertising for pharmaceuticals; might this go the way of tobacco? Can behavioral targeting survive increased calls for privacy protection?

Crystal balls and predictions are not my thing, and I have long learned to take the word "never" out of my political lexicon. So here are four issues worth noting as our new administration takes form:

1. The Obama team has proven itself the most technology savvy of any in the history of our country.
Books will be written about what these folks have accomplished by integrating their technology and media experiences, and every marketer worth his or her salt should be thinking about the lessons learned here.

At the core of the Obama team's achievements were at least three great successes wrapped around a clear brand proposition. First, the campaign was an audience knowledge machine, segmenting people and managing data to offer richly personal, directly relevant and consistent engagements.

Second, every experience was verbal -- a call to action -- not only to give money, but share ideas and recruit others (physically and online), all in the cause of clear goals.

Third, every "ask" offered a clear path to greater and more interesting engagement. By announcing his VP choice by text, for example, Obama started a path of engagement that ended in an organized effort to get out the vote via text two months later. There is no sign that this machine has stopped now that the race is over, and one can reasonably bet that the lessons learned here will be imbedded in governance.

In short, the Obama team fully understands the power of interactivity as an educational, marketing and behavioral necessity. They know that conversations are happening anyway, and not engaging in the fray is tantamount to becoming irrelevant -- and keeping anyone from engaging their perspectives is equivalent to muzzling basic First Amendment rights.

2. Congress, however, is not so techy. 
Few Washington moments caused more of a viral stir on YouTube than Sen. Stevens' description of the internet as a "bunch of tubes." I spent some time talking about technology and the potential of the internet with a leading Democrat member of the House, one destined to have significant input into media and marketing issues. He invited me to meet with his staff, as they have not "focused on this internet thing as much as we need to."

Internet thing?

Certainly a new generation of public servants, raised on interactive capabilities, is coming to town. But the lion's share of attention paid to marketing by legislators and regulators is focused on traditional marketing, especially television. This distinction is critical. Can a constrained 30- or 60-second ad that most people tune out or skip compare with the quality and quantity of engagement in an interactive environment?

Smart marketers, of course, are considering this question regardless of potential legislative pressure. Our new government will worry about the veracity of health messaging in areas such as childhood obesity and poor prescriptions, but there is also likely to be a concerted look at what each medium offers in terms of letting marketers promote and equipping consumers to make the best decisions.

3. All things in proportion. 
The fact is, marketers can be their own worst enemies by hoping that the government will either go away or be lobbied off the edge. What is needed, in both Washington and around the country, is clear education and self-control. Anyone who banks online knows that cookies aren't universally a bad thing. In the cacophony of information, getting the right advertising message in front of the right audience doesn't just improve the ROI of marketers, it becomes valued content by a recipient tired of irrelevant messaging.

The key is transparency and permission. Pharmaceutical companies want to make money, but they are also sitting on some of the most remarkable research and information about serious conditions. If a user understands a source and has given the OK to receiving or engaging with specific information, then marketing is no longer a necessary evil to pay the bills, but a useful resource. The new regulatory teams may want to put a few pelts on the wall, but there will also be unprecedented opportunity for self-regulation done seriously, openly and clearly -- not just to head off Congress, but simply because it makes sense.

4. All this can lead to a total revolution in interactive marketing that has been simmering under the covers for years. 
The amount of information and environments available to educate consumers, the ability to get the right message in front of relevant audiences and the ability for audiences to share, research and compare propositions should have caused an enormous shift to interactive marketing long ago.

Traditional marketing still has value, of course, but new technologies truly allow marketers to be on the consumer's side, as users are now in control of the information flow and decision-making. It will take a thick skin on the part of marketers, but the rewards will be significant.

This being Washington, one friend advised me that it's better not to get the government too focused on interactive marketing, as they'll try to stop the music there too. With a few exceptions, I do not believe our new administration will try to stop anything that falls on the side of transparency, permission and helping people make the best decisions for their lives. But this will take education, commitment and focus, with as much onus on marketers as public officials. 

Christopher Schroeder is the CEO of The HealthCentral Network.