Defamation resource
Online defamation, reviews and social media: what to do before it spreads
Published 6 May 2026 · Reviewed for England and Wales, May 2026
Online defamation moves quickly. A damaging review, post or video can be copied, screenshotted and repeated before the person affected has worked out what to say. The first response should preserve evidence and reduce harm, not create a larger public argument.
About this guidance
This page is about England and Wales only. It is general information only, not legal advice.
Reviewed by Resolutor Legal Support for England and Wales in May 2026.
The first hour
Before replying, preserve the post. Take screenshots showing the whole statement, username, date, URL, comments, likes, shares and surrounding thread. If it is a video or story that may disappear, record it lawfully and quickly. Save the link and note how you found it.
Then identify the risk. Is the statement false? Is it opinion? Does it identify you or your business? Has it reached customers, employers, funders, professional contacts or a small private audience? Is it still live?
Reviews
Bad reviews are not automatically defamatory. A customer can usually express honest criticism. The stronger concern is a false factual allegation: fraud, dishonesty, abuse, criminality, unsafe conduct, fake qualifications or conduct that would seriously damage trust.
If the review is from someone who was never a customer, or it contains allegations that can be disproved by records, preserve booking data, invoices, messages, delivery notes and any complaint history. Avoid posting private customer information in a public reply.
Social media posts
Social media context matters. A post in a small private group may still be publication, but harm may be harder to prove than a viral public post. A thread that invites others to pile on can increase reputational damage. Reposts and quote posts should be captured separately.
Do not assume deletion solves everything. If the post has spread, identify where it went and who saw it. If it has not spread, a measured takedown request may be better than a public escalation.
Platform reports
Most platforms have reporting tools for harassment, false reviews, impersonation, privacy or harmful content. A platform report can be faster and cheaper than legal correspondence, but it should be drafted carefully. Platforms often respond better to specific policy breaches than general complaints that something is defamatory.
Keep a copy of the report and any response. If the platform refuses removal, that refusal may still help show what steps were taken to limit harm.
Public response
A public response can either reduce harm or amplify the allegation. For businesses, a short neutral response may be enough: acknowledge awareness, state that the allegation is inaccurate, and invite direct contact. Avoid naming the poster aggressively or publishing personal data.
If the allegation is serious, get the position clear before posting. A rushed response can accidentally admit something, create a new allegation or make the dispute more visible.
Proving harm
For a defamation claim, serious harm is central. For a trading business, serious financial loss or likely serious financial loss is required. Track enquiries, cancellations, lost contracts, search results, complaints from third parties, analytics and changes in revenue where they can be linked to the publication.
The evidence should connect the statement to the impact. General stress, embarrassment or annoyance is not usually enough for a strong defamation case.
The short version
With online defamation, preserve evidence first, assess serious harm, use platform tools where sensible, and avoid a public reply that spreads the allegation further. The strongest responses are specific, calm and backed by records.
Nothing in this guide is legal advice for your specific situation.