As the protests over the controversial presidential elections in Iran continue to maintain their traction, a question attracting more attention is whether Twitter has changed this week after the U.S. State Department asked it to postpone schedule maintenance to keep lines of communications open.

If Twitter is now deemed to be an essential communications medium, will that change how it’s regarded by the mainstream? In other words, will Twitter’s role within the Iranian political ecosystem cause people to no longer see it as a place where people talk about inane topics such as having coffee or tending to sick pets?

In some respects, this week could be seen as a juncture in time when Twitter took an important step forward to becoming an established digital communications tool, along with e-mail and instant messaging.

Twitter’s role in Iran could also be the turning point that could prompt even more traction for growth, which Compete.com suggested plateaued last month compared with April after a huge growth during the first four months of 2009.

For Twitter, its new status offers opportunities and challenges. Being seen as a mainstream communications tool could attractions millions of user names and, as important, respect as an essential service. On the other hand, it could also put more pressure on Twitter’s infrastructure at a time when Twitter appears to have got things under control.

And it wouldn’t be a proper discussion of Twitter if its business model wasn’t brought into the mix. What impact, if any, could Iran having on Twitter as a business? If Twitter is regarded as a must-have communications tool, does it also mean some people would be willing to pay for Twitter to have better QoS, etc.

For more thoughts on Twitter, check out CNet, which wonders if Twitter has become a critical application.

(Note: This blog post was cross-posted on Twitterrati)

Technorati Tags: politics, iran