Re: Not necessarily conspiracy nuts
I see a space for a regular online magazine with updates and articles on the current status of the various conspiracies du hour and carrying ads for high quality tin foils,
But given the number of out there conspiracies out there, it'd end up being a magazine the size of 12 month's worth of PCW. Back in the day, there used to be usenet groups semi-dedicated to this, like cam.misc. But that was also partly due to keeping track/score of conspiracies that originated there. Trolling's taken a new meaning since then, sadly.
But 'best' conspiracy theory for vacines is seizing on the fact that the mRNA ones use nanoparticles. Which can then be controlled/directed by 5G signals (naturally). A couple even managed to combine swarm research to suggest that this can be used to get the nanites doing more nefarious things*.
Boring little details like the nanoparticles being polymers get glossed over. But that does give me the idea that you could probably convince people that this means massive (ish) amounts of microplastics. But that's too easy, and probably not a good idea to give anti-vaxxers any more ideas.
*I started writing a novel based on nano-zombies, because classical zombies just don't work. Which amused me for a while, but there's already waaaay too many zombie books on the market.