What to Do If You Are Being Defamed: How to Preserve Evidence

Potentially defamatory material published online can be edited, deleted or copied to other platforms within minutes. If you believe you or your business is being defamed, preserving a clear record of what has been published should be one of your first actions.

For advice about serious allegations or an escalating online attack, call Nath Solicitors on 020 3983 8278 or complete our online contact form.

A screenshot is a useful starting point, but a stronger evidence record can include the complete publication, URL, account details, date and time, surrounding context and available information showing who saw or shared the material.

Nath Solicitors advises individuals, professionals and businesses on defamation, social media publications and reputation disputes. This guide explains practical steps you can take before online material disappears or changes.

Quick evidence checklist

If potentially defamatory material has been published about you or your business, consider preserving:

• the complete publication;
• the direct URL;
• the publisher’s account and profile details;
• the date and time of publication;
• surrounding posts, comments or messages;
• screenshots or screen recordings;
• original images, audio or video where available;
• visible views, shares, reactions and comments;
• copies or republications appearing elsewhere; and
• evidence of reputational or financial consequences.

Keep original copies wherever possible. If you later crop, highlight or annotate evidence for reference, retain the untouched original separately.

What should you do if you are being defamed?

1. Capture the exact publication

Take screenshots showing the complete post, comment, review, article or message.

Try to capture the words complained of in full rather than taking a tightly cropped image. Where the allegation appears within a longer post, thread or conversation, preserve enough surrounding material to show its context.

Where possible, capture the whole webpage or screen showing enough information to identify both the publication and where it appeared.

For videos, livestreams or temporary content, save the original material where the platform permits this. A screen recording can provide a useful record where direct saving is not available.

Keep an original copy of every screenshot or recording. If you later highlight or annotate an image for reference, retain the untouched version separately.

2. Save the URL and publisher details

A screenshot may show what was said without clearly establishing where the publication appeared or who published it.

Record the direct URL where one exists. Save the account name, username, handle, profile name and any identifying information visible on the publisher’s profile.

Where the account is anonymous, uses a false identity or appears to impersonate another person, preserve the profile page before it changes.

Our Anonymous Posts and Online Attacks page explains some of the additional issues that can arise where the identity of the publisher is unknown.

3. Record dates and times

Note when the material was published, where this information is displayed, and when you first discovered it.

Record the date and time when you captured the evidence too.

This information may help establish the publication history and distinguish an original publication from later copies or republications.

Defamation claims in England and Wales are generally subject to a one-year limitation period. However, limitation can become legally complex where material remains online or is published again.

Do not assume that every repost or continued availability of the same material automatically starts a new one-year period. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 contains a single publication rule that can affect how limitation is calculated.

4. Preserve the surrounding context

Context can materially affect the meaning of a publication.

Save the preceding and following posts, comments or messages where they help explain what has been said.

For messaging applications, preserve the relevant conversation rather than a single isolated message.

Comments beneath a publication may contain further allegations, repetitions or information showing how other users understood the original material.

If a publication quotes another post or responds to earlier content, preserve that material too.

5. Record evidence of reach and republication

Where the information is visible, record:

• views;
• likes or reactions;
• shares or reposts;
• comments;
• follower or subscriber numbers;
• group or channel membership;
• quotations or reblogs; and
• copies appearing on other accounts, websites or platforms.

Do not rely on engagement figures alone.

A publication reaching a relatively small number of employers, customers, colleagues, suppliers or professional contacts may still have significant reputational consequences.

Our Social Media Defamation and Reputation Recovery page covers disputes involving allegations that have circulated across social networks and other online platforms.

6. Keep evidence of reputational or financial harm

The publication itself is only part of the evidence that may become relevant.

Preserve emails, messages or other communications from people who mention the allegation. Record lost opportunities or changes in professional, personal or commercial relationships that appear connected with the publication.

For individuals, the legal assessment includes whether the publication has caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm to reputation.

For a body trading for profit, section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 provides that serious harm requires the publication to have caused, or be likely to cause, serious financial loss.

For a business, potentially relevant evidence may therefore include:

• lost enquiries;
• cancelled orders or bookings;
• lost contracts;
• communications from concerned customers;
• supplier or investor concerns;
• reduced sales; or
• other identifiable financial consequences.

More information is available on our Commercial Reputation and Business Defamation page.

7. Preserve evidence of spoken allegations

Defamation is not confined to material published online.

If allegations were spoken to other people, write down the words as accurately as you can.

Record:

• who made the statement;
• what was said;
• when it was said;
• where it was said;
• who heard it; and
• the details of any potential witnesses.

Create the note as soon as reasonably possible while your recollection is fresh.

Where possible, distinguish what you personally heard from information later reported to you by somebody else.

8. Preserve the evidence before deciding whether to respond

Do not report the material, block the account or contact the publisher until you have preserved the evidence you may need.

Contact can sometimes lead to material being deleted or altered. A public argument can also expose an allegation to people who had not previously seen it.

Once the evidence has been secured, the next step may involve a platform complaint, direct legal correspondence or another form of intervention.

The appropriate response will depend on the publication, the legal issues, the extent of the harm and the result you want to achieve.

9. Take legal advice without unnecessary delay

Defamation claims in England and Wales are generally subject to a one-year limitation period, so serious publication disputes should not be allowed to drift.

The Pre-Action Protocol for Media and Communications Claims sets out the information expected when a defamation claim is raised. This includes sufficient detail to identify the publication, the statement complained of and the basis on which serious harm is alleged.

Early legal assessment can help establish which evidence matters, whether further preservation steps are required and whether there is a proper legal basis for intervention.

For an overview of the legal tests, possible remedies and how a claim may progress, see our Defamation, Reputation Management and Privacy page.

What should you avoid doing?

When potentially defamatory material appears, consider avoiding steps that may make the situation harder to assess or resolve.

In particular:

• do not delete or alter your original evidence;
• do not ask other people to repost the allegation simply so that you can capture it;
• do not unnecessarily repeat the allegation publicly;
• do not assume that confronting the publisher immediately is always the best strategy;
• do not alter screenshots or recordings without keeping the originals; and
• do not attempt to access another person’s account, device or private information without permission in order to obtain evidence.

Preserving the existing evidence is different from creating further publication of the allegation.

What evidence should you preserve on each social media platform?

Different platforms display publication, account and engagement information in different ways.

The following checklist can help identify the information worth preserving.

What if the potentially defamatory post has already been deleted?

A deleted post does not necessarily mean that every record of the publication has disappeared.

Check whether you have:

• screenshots;
• notifications;
• emails;
• messages;
• browser history;
• copies sent to you by other recipients;
• reposts or quotations; or
• other material showing what was published.

Other people who saw the publication may also have retained copies.

A public webpage may have been captured by an online archive, although archived material should not be treated as a substitute for preserving the original publication while it is still available.

Do not ask other people to repost the material simply to create evidence. That may increase its circulation.

You should also not attempt to gain unauthorised access to private accounts or systems simply because the original publication has disappeared.

Why does preserving evidence matter in a defamation claim?

A defamation case requires more than saying that harmful material appeared online.

A solicitor may need to assess:

• precisely what was published;
• what meaning the words or material conveyed;
• whether the claimant was identifiable;
• who received the publication;
• how widely it circulated;
• whether it was repeated elsewhere; and
• what evidence exists of actual or likely serious harm.

For a company trading for profit, evidence of actual or likely serious financial loss may also be central.

The Pre-Action Protocol for Media and Communications Claims requires a prospective claimant to provide enough detail to identify the relevant publication and explain the basis of the proposed claim.

A clear evidence record can make that assessment more accurate and reduce disputes about what appeared online before material was edited, deleted or removed.

Our experience with online defamation evidence

Nath Solicitors has more than 30 years of litigation and advisory experience and has acted in reputation disputes involving Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, YouTube, Google reviews, Trustpilot and anonymous online publications.

Our published work includes matters involving false Google and Trustpilot reviews, allegations circulated through Instagram and Snapchat, Facebook and YouTube campaigns, anonymous or false accounts and material distributed within private online groups.

Legal intervention in published matters has resulted in posts and reviews being removed, undertakings against republication and, in a serious coordinated online campaign, urgent High Court relief.

Read further examples on our Defamation Case Studies page.

Why clients instruct Nath Solicitors

Nath Solicitors combines more than 30 years of litigation and advisory experience with practical experience of online defamation and reputation disputes.

Clients have direct access to senior lawyers, and our published work includes disputes involving social media, false reviews, anonymous publications and urgent High Court proceedings.

Our focus is on preserving the evidence, assessing whether there is a proper legal basis for intervention and identifying a proportionate strategy for limiting further reputational harm.

This page contains general information about the law in England and Wales. It does not constitute legal advice in relation to any particular matter.

Reviewed by Shubha Nath, Solicitor and Director.