Defamation and social media expert lawyers. Best defamation solicitor

Internet Law Specialist Lawyers FREE CALL 0800 612 7211

Recently removed from the internet

Law Society Awards winners. Cohen Davis

What our clients say...
"Have used twice and will use again. "
“Excellent, professional service delivered within a tight timeline. Have used twice and... Read More...
Contact our super friendly Social Media lawyers today!

Click HERE to Call Free for immediate help! 0800 612 7211


Every situation is different so by far the best way to find out how to respond to a social media legal issue is to speak to those who are most likely to have dealt with a situation similar to yours.
To find out how you can improve your reputation on the internet simply select one of the easy methods of contacting us.

Please use the form below to contact us.
We will respond as soon as possible.


Or you can call us on our free hotline.

FREEPHONE  0800 612 7211

(+) 44 207 183 4 123 from outside the UK.

Or if you prefer you can email us to helpline (at)

TheInternet LawCentre

Defamation on Twitter

Defamation on Twitter

Defamation on Twitter by an anonymous user

Defamation on Twitter by anonymous Twitter users could cause substantial harm to the reputation of a business. The anonymous Twitter user might be a competitor, someone with a personal vendetta or someone you have never met or heard about. There will be cases where business defamation might also be part of a campaign of harassment against a business

An example of a defamation campaign by an anonymous Twitter user

Getting disclosure from Twitter

Winning a case of Twitter defamation

An example of a defamation by anonymous Twitter user

Meet Richard (not his real name). Richard is an entrepreneur who has been working on creating a new quality brand of whiskey. Richard and his wife, Angela, are passionate about quality whiskey and a few years ago they decided to create a new premium whiskey brand. The brand had been selling on a popular basis, to quality restaurants and hotels in England and the USA.

A Twitter user, who went by the user name “WizzardTheWhiskey ” had decided to start a defamation campaign, targeting Richard and his quality whiskey brand. The campaign comprised of tweets on Twitter and the embedding of tweets on a number of websites. The purpose of embedding tweets on websites, in this context, is often done to try and make the defamatory tweets come up on Google search results more than once. Google treats each website as an independent source of information which means the same tweet may appear two or even three times on the same Google search result.

The defamatory tweets included false allegations that Richard was a fraudster and a convicted criminal. The allegations were completely unfounded and untrue. Richard was unable to guess who the individual behind the defamatory tweets was, but he believed that the person might be someone who he didn’t know because the same individual was also tweeting about other individuals and brands who were connected with the whiskey industry. Richard could not think of anyone he knew with an obvious reason to target him.

What Richard was certain about though, was the fact that the dissemination of the defamatory tweets was causing and was likely to continue to cause him significant financial harm as well as serious damage to his brand and to his personal reputation. Richard had reported the defamatory tweets to Twitter but Twitter had failed to take action to have them removed.

By the time Richard contacted us, he was at the point where he was sure that a significant amount of hard work, which him and his wife had both invested, generating quality commercial interest in the brand, was being wasted due to the defamatory tweets, which could be easily found upon basic due diligence. In the past few weeks before approaching us, Richard had experienced rejections, which can only be explained by the defamatory tweets. After all, no one wants to be associated with a tainted brand or with individuals accused of serious crimes.

Defamation on X (Twitter) Legal Advice FAQ

Defamation on X differs from defamation in traditional media in a few key ways. Firstly, the speed and ease of sharing information on X allows for rapid dissemination of potentially defamatory statements to a global audience. Additionally, the casual and informal nature of X can sometimes blur the line between opinion and fact, complicating the determination of defamation. Furthermore, the anonymity and pseudonymity of X users can make it more difficult to hold individuals accountable for defamatory statements. Finally, the limited character count on X can lead to oversimplification or misrepresentation of information, potentially exacerbating the harm caused by defamatory statements.

Some common examples of defamation on X include making false statements about someone's character, spreading rumors or false information that harms someone's reputation, making false accusations of illegal activity, or publicly shaming someone without evidence or proper justification. Defamatory posts can include statements about individuals, celebrities, companies, or public figures, and can have serious consequences both legally and socially. It is important to be cautious and considerate when engaging on social media platforms to avoid engaging in defamatory behavior.

Yes, a post can still be considered defamatory even if it includes an opinion rather than a statement of fact. While opinions are generally protected under the First Amendment, if a post includes false statements of fact that harm someone's reputation, it could still be considered defamatory. Courts will look at the overall context of the post and assess whether a reasonable person would interpret it as a statement of fact or simply an expression of opinion. Additionally, if the post includes defamatory implications or insinuations, it may still be considered defamatory. The distinction between fact and opinion can be complex and depends on the specific circumstances of each case.

Individuals can protect themselves from being accused of defamation on X by being mindful of what they post and ensuring that their statements are accurate and supported by evidence. It is important to avoid making false or damaging statements about others and to refrain from engaging in online bullying or harassment. Additionally, individuals can consider using privacy settings and being cautious about who they interact with on the platform. It is also advisable to familiarise themselves with the laws and guidelines surrounding defamation in their jurisdiction to better understand their rights and responsibilities.

The legal consequences for defaming someone on X can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the severity of the defamation. Generally, the person who made the defamatory statement may face civil liability and be sued for damages by the affected party. In some cases, they may also face criminal charges for defamation, although this is less common. Additionally, X's terms of service prohibit defamation, and the platform may suspend or terminate the account of the user who engaged in defamatory behavior. It is important to consult with a legal professional for specific advice on defamation laws in your jurisdiction.

Getting disclosure from Twitter

We have applied the following strategy to successfully win many of the anonymous Twitter defamation cases. As a first step, it is important to identify all the defamatory tweets. Often, not all the defamatory tweets might appear on Google searches because Google would only pick a selection of search results from any particular source on the internet. It is important, however, to identify all the defamatory instances first, and to make sure that you include them all with any removal requests. If you neglect this task, once the currently visible tweets are deleted, Google will replace them with similar tweets that are currently unseen. Next, we write to Twitter and to Google, to request the deletion and the delisting of the defamatory tweets from each of the networks.

This is a fairly quick way to try and have the defamatory tweets deleted, whilst we prepare the third step. The third step may incur more preparation, but can also be affected fairly quickly. It involves a formal request to Twitter to disclose (Norwich Paramcal Order) to us the true identity of the user who twitted the defamatory tweets including all the information that Twitter has stored about him. Twitter is likely to consent to the request, provided we obtain a court order, which would remove any data protection implications for Twitter.

Usually we are able to agree with Twitter in advance, a draft disclosure order, which we then submit to the court, together with a claim for defamation for the time being against “person unknown”. Often, Twitter users prefer to remove the defamatory posts as soon as they are notified of Twitter’s intention to disclose their personal information to us, so in the vast majority of cases the defaming Twitter user would remove all the defamatory tweets before the case even gets to court. Regardless of whether the disclosure from Twitter reveals useful information about their user,

Our clients are often able to pursue a successful legal action for defamation either against the real person behind the user account or against “person unknown”. Whether the claim remains against “person unknown or against the real person, often we will apply for either a default judgement, because the individual hadn’t filed a defence, or to a summary judgment or because the individual, even if he filed a defence, his defence was weak. This allows the matter to be successfully concluded early without having to go through lengthy court proceedings or trials. Either way, in most cases, our clients are likely to secure an injunction that allows them to remove all the defamatory posts currently on the internet as well as future, similar posts.

Winning a case of Twitter defamation

The process of removing the defamatory tweets and securing the reputation of the individual and their business against future defamation could take a few weeks or a few months, depending on the factors that apply to each case. Whilst we would always do whatever we can, to facilitate the removal of the defamatory posts as fast as possible, and then, to secure a long-term solution, each case is different in terms of facts, duration and costs.

In the case of Richard and his whiskey brand, following an application for a disclosure order from Twitter, within days, the entire Twitter account was disabled. It is often difficult whether it was disabled by Twitter because Twitter was unable to match the information it had to an individual, or whether Twitter simply decided that it was, indeed, unfair for our client to sustain such a devastating campaign of defamation.

Once the defaming Twitter account was disabled, and links to the defamatory tweets were removed from Google, Richard, supported by our advice, had decided to put the legal proceedings on hold as his pressing issue had effectively been resolved. The entire process of removing the defamatory tweets from Twitter and from Google took around 6 weeks for Richard's case. 

Case studies are based on true cases where names, dates and circumstances have often been amended to protect the identity of those involved.

Are you a victim of defamation? Time might be of the essence. Call us now for legal advice on +44 207 183 4123 or send a request and we will contact you as soon as possible.


Search the entire site

Follow on Twitter

a flat out uncond

Signature cases

Our work featured on

Latest Articles

Explore this topic!

Online defamation