>> "How do you properly refute someones conspiracy theory anyways"
As usual, with actual facts, based on hard reality and hundreds of years of scientific method.
Or recognize and point out, that it is so detached from such reality that, as physicists often note about the nutters writing in: "it isn't even wrong".
Of course, that doesn't often work for those deeply embedded in conspiracy theory, or actively spreading dezinformatsiya. You can't convince them, but you can point out for others who are not all the way into nutter-land, that maybe they shouldn't keep going down that path.
Currently the recommendation engines actively push people to extreme views. Zuckerberg had research brought to him showing that Facebook exposed users to more and more extreme views, and that 30% of people joining extreme groups did it by FB's reccmendation. He said he never wanted to hear about it again [1]
It is not only fact checking. If you say fact checking is problematic, they could at least not actively encourage falsehoods and extremes.
These platforms' tolerance and indeed active spreading of alternative facts, desinformatsiya, outright lies, and extreme conspiracy theories is actively undermining democracy worldwide. They may be profitable for a time, but the externalized damage is insane.
Let the downvote brigades get to work.
[1]https://news.yahoo.com/mark-zuckerberg-reportedly-brushed-as...