Defamation, Reputation & Social Media

Recently we have seen a number of high-profile defamation cases and settlements relating to tweets posted via Twitter, broadcasts including TED talks, public speeches and e-mails. This trend is likely to continue as we use social media to vent our frustrations or make political statements, without giving much thought, if any, to the consequences.

For most individuals and businesses, online reputations are now more important than offline ones, so it is not surprising that such mediums are actively monitored and protected. Social media is changing marketing and brand management. Most businesses rely on public reviews to establish trusted brands and seek to guide contributors in the right direction. Some go on to moderate reviews before publication.

Elon Musk recently won a defamation claim against him in the US, brought by Vernon Unsworth, following a Twitter row where he called Mr. Unsworth a “pedo guy”. Mr. Unsworth sought $190m (£145m)   in damages from the Tesla founder, on the basis that this tweet damaged his reputation. Elon Musk’s lawyer introduced the concept of “JDart” to describe his tweet as a joke that was badly received, which resulted in it being deleted with an apology and tweets to move on from the matter.

Here in the UK, investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr is the subject of a defamation claim by insurance businessman Arron Banks, who funded the Leave.EU campaign group. The claim relates to the meaning of statements in two public talks and two tweets relating to electoral funding and Mr. Bank’s relationship with Russia. In a recent preliminary ruling, Mr. Justice Saini said that an overly legalistic approach to meaning should be avoided, as an ordinary person watching or listening to a broadcast or public speech would not take such an approach.

So, can you use the internet to express an opinion or criticism? How far can you go, especially if your comments are critical and unlikely to be well-received?

As explained in our defamation articles Parts 1 and 2, in defamation law, an honest opinion is a defence to a claim. Therefore, leaving an honest review or comment about an actual experience or product is not a problem. To meet the defence, a statement should be stated as an opinion, with details of the basis of it, and, beheld such that an honest person could have held the opinion based on any fact, which existed at the time the statement was published. You should avoid leaving any review based on hear-say, intended maliciously, untrue or exaggerated.

Claims for defamation (libel or slander) must be brought within one year of the date of publication. For material that continues to be published online, the countdown starts to run from the date the material was first published.

If you require pre-publication advice or are the victim of genuine reputational harm, get in touch today on 0203 146 3549 /


All our articles are intended for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. It is recommended that specific professional advice is sought before acting on any of the information provided.

Like this article? Share on


Related articles

Information about our own complaints process, raising concerns to the Legal Ombudsman and to us

We want to give you the best possible service. However, if at any point you become unhappy or concerned about the service we provided then you should inform us immediately, so that we can do our best to resolve the problem.

In the first instance it may be helpful to contact the person who is working on your case to discuss your concerns and we will do our best to resolve any issues at this stage. If you would like to make a formal complaint, then you can read our full complaints procedure here. Making a complaint will not affect how we handle your case.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority can help you if you are concerned about our behaviour. This could be for things like dishonesty, taking or losing your money or treating you unfairly because of your age, a disability or other characteristic. 

You can raise your concerns with the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

What do to if we cannot resolve your complaint

The Legal Ombudsman can help you if we are unable to resolve your complaint ourselves. They will look at your complaint independently and it will not affect how we handle your case.

Before accepting a complaint for investigation, the Legal Ombudsman will check that you have tried to resolve your complaint with us first. If you have, then you must take your complaint to the Legal Ombudsman:

  • Within six months of receiving our final response to your complaint; and,
  • Within one year of the date of the act or omission about which you are concerned; or
  • Within one year of you realising that there was a concern.


If you would like more information about the Legal Ombudsman, you can contact them at the following details:

 Contact details

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By closing this message, you consent to our cookies on this device in accordance with our cookie policy unless you have disabled them.