Computers plus humans always beat computers. You can see this in particular in the realm of chess, where a human and computer pair of players can beat a computer.
Now suddenly launching a recommendation algorithm to silently chug along and produce recommendations looks like a fools errand, as there will always be groups that have an incentive, either monetary or otherwise, to use humans and computers together to subvert your algorithm. See for example Russia’s Internet Research Agency and their computer generated troll army.
I never thought of the chess analogy here.
However, I think corporations, at least social media ones, know their recommendation systems can be "beaten" by people; they just don't think they've actually lost as long as engagement is high, therefore growth continues and speculative value of the company rises. GROWTH FOR THE GROWTH GOD as my friend Matt says.
Again, this is the real reason Twitter and other social media companies place equal value on Nazi speech and normal speech. Nazi speech gets condemned, and condemnation is engagement. Every time people tweet "Get rid of the Nazis, @jack!", they are:
- Participating on the platform
- Getting others to participate on the platform, both racist and not
- Giving Twitter a chance to (truthfully) tell advertisers they have more active users. (Advertisers do not give a fuck if you are angry or not; they just care if you will see their (often non-Promoted) tweets.)
- Making investors see that, hey, they keep on piling users that look at shit! Someone may want to buy them!