With the 2008 elections now behind us, even those who are the least enthusiastic about social networking and social media have had to admit its increasing influence. MSNBC ran a story recently about a Dartmouth Student who managed to get elected as County Treasurer in New Hampshire by running Facebook ads worth $50 and riding the coattails of her national party.

I can report to you, with near certainty, that very few candidates will get elected solely on the basis of Facebook ads. All other things being equal, a well run campaign, that uses all of the appropriate marketing channels, is still the most effective strategy. What’s forever changed is that you can no longer ignore what many decision makers in government agencies and government affairs shops consider to be “alternative” forms of media and marketing.

With the success of the Obama campaign, it’s safe to anticipate the highest form of flattery – imitation – to take place at all levels of campaigning and, even more importantly, in the administration of their duties by federal, state and local governments. Interest groups, agency heads, and future candidates of all stripes, will want to add the same “secret sauce” to their efforts that they witnessed on a grand scale in 2008.

Decision makers trying to figure out how Obama did it will likely spend some of the same effort exploring the wide world of social networking that many of us early adopters did. What they’ll find, if they research much, is that a $50 Facebook ad campaign will not meet their needs. Instead, they’ll want to keep much of their current communications strategies and then add social media to the mix.

An integrated effort is what the smarter and more aggressive government affairs shop or government agency will settle on. Some are already well on their wa in this regard, and nothing I’m writing here will be new to them. Many are now taking a first or second look, however, and are deciding that they may need to take action after taking a wait-and-see attitude leading up to the election.

It’s not a surprise that there would be hesitancy in the corridors of government. Even some avid social media users on Twitter debated with me that an Obama loss would be a repudiation of social media in campaigns. I argued against that line of reasoning because I never saw his campaign as a social media effort per se, but as an integrated marketing and communications campaign that was extremely social media friendly. Social media didn’t win the campaign, but it did end up helping.

It’s estimated that the Obama campaign now has over 10 million “good” email addresses and a vast array of other contacts in their social graph. Fortunately, state and local efforts won’t need those kinds of numbers. Interest groups hoping to affect federal legislation, however, will need something more than a Facebook campaign to have an impact. They’ll need a fully integrated effort that includes traditional and social media.

Two key issue areas that are particularly suited to integrated communications efforts are health care reform and clean energy initiatives. Traditional advertising can still enhance awareness of an issue, but consumers will go online to verify what they’re being told. They’ll consult with their networks, communities, and other trusted online sources to confirm or dispel what traditional media sources are telling them.

If advocates for health care reform or clean energy hope to be effective in their post-2008 election efforts, they will certainly need to employ the same kinds of successful strategies utilized by the Obama campaign. A fully integrated effort, which includes social media and online marketing strategies, will be essential for these kinds of successful efforts going forward.