Even if the rational reason for being slapdash is lack of resources and lack of focus, that means the company is not investing enough on addressing the underlying problems. Things happen, and sometimes you need to jump to put out a fire - but if putting out fires is a routine mode of work, it's a symptom of a much wider problem.

I am under no illusion that trying to protect against disinformation and propaganda would be easy. As you said, the volume is so vast that it's going to require a lot of effort and immense focus. Constant firefighting shifts the efforts, and deprives focus.

Whether that's intentional or an emerging property, the end result is the same.

The degree of nuance leads me to believe it's just impossible to do at commercial/global scale (though I would agree it could be done better than it currently is).

One person : one opinion seems a fair goal.

Posting all day about something as yourself is very different than running a network of accounts.

If they are managing to do so much harm through indifference and greed just imagine what they could do if they were explicitly trying to manipulate the world for "good"?

Powerful groups who try to optimize the world have a pretty poor track record compared to those who just try to do their own stuff right and let the world sort itself out.

So let's handle moderation in... let's say Saudi-Arabia, by having them silence LGBT and women's rights advocates?

And who is responsible for Saudi-Arabian citizens in exile? Saudi-Arabia? The country where they live in? The country where they are currently on vacation?

Hence the boycott of South Africa.

There was a brief window in which Twitter was allowed to spread dissent pretty freely in the Arab world. I've no idea what that looks like now.