In response to a recent job posting for a Sports Editorial Associate Producer, Fast Company is hypothesizing that Twitter is on a quest to develop original content.

Though the role (and the subsequent explanation of the posting) could mean a number of things – my guess is they are developing thought leadership for outside organizations – the notion of Twitter as publisher raises some interesting questions.

Should a platform built for the transference of individual perspectives be awarded their own perspective?  If Twitter were to build out a staff of sports journalists, would that be counterproductive to their relationship with other outlets, such as ESPN or Sports Illustrated? To what end would competitors be put at a disadvantage in attracting followers?  Even more: how long would they put up with it before moving on to something else?

It seems odd, to me, for Twitter to want to reduce themselves to the role of user in a world they create and control.  It’s one thing to tout what others are doing (like with their Twitter Stories), but a completely different proposition to do it themselves.  They certainly know their system – its intent and capabilities – better than anyone else, but they should (and, I believe, will) use that knowledge to guide others and not displace them.

(Granted, I’ll take every bit of this back if they can sign Charles Barkley as a correspondent; the world needs that man’s thoughts written down in real time).