If you are searching for legal help with reputation harm, you will see a mix of marketing agencies, consultants, and law firms. This guide is for the “law firm” lane, when you need a real legal strategy, documentation discipline, and escalation options that do not create a bigger story.
- This is general information, not legal advice. Laws and outcomes vary by jurisdiction and facts.
- This list is not an endorsement and is not exhaustive. Always run conflicts checks before sharing sensitive details.
- Use caution contacting many firms at once. Conflicts can reduce your options.
A practical way to compare 12 firms that publicly describe defamation, privacy, online harm, or reputation-related disputes as a focus. You will also get a proof-first intake checklist and a simple “fit lane” estimator you can paste into a WordPress HTML block.
Open 30-second summary
- Pick counsel by jurisdiction, urgency, and whether you need plaintiff-side action, defendant-side defense, or both.
- Lead with screenshots, dates, and a short timeline. Do not lead with a long story.
- Start with the lowest-fuel step (policy route, narrow correction, limited demand) before escalation.
- Assume anything you send can be screenshotted. Write for that reality.
Fast comparison table
| Firm | Primary lane | Region focus | Good fit for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clare Locke | Plaintiff-focused defamation | US | High-stakes reputational attacks and complex defamation litigation. |
| Minc Law | Online defamation, content removal | US | Internet defamation, anonymity issues, removal strategy and ORM legal support. |
| KJK | Content removal and internet disputes | US | Damaging online content, review attacks, and practical removal strategy planning. |
| Davis Wright Tremaine | Media, defamation, privacy litigation | US | Defamation and privacy disputes tied to media and content industries. |
| Gibson Dunn | First Amendment and free expression | Global | Major disputes where free expression, defamation risk, and high exposure overlap. |
| Carter-Ruck | Reputation, media, privacy | UK, cross-border | UK-led reputation and privacy matters, often with international elements. |
| Schillings | Reputation, privacy, security | UK, global | High-stakes privacy breaches, reputation threats, harassment and data misuse scenarios. |
| Mishcon de Reya | Reputation protection and crisis | UK | Media law disputes including defamation, privacy, harassment, and data protection. |
| Wiggin | Defamation and reputation management | UK | Content clearance and reputation disputes across publishing, broadcast, and media. |
| Harbottle & Lewis | Reputation and information law | UK, global | Defamation, privacy, data protection, harassment, and information risk management. |
| RPC | Media and content disputes | UK | Defendant-focused media disputes, defamation defense, privacy and related issues. |
| Reed Smith | Entertainment and media disputes | US, UK, global | Entertainment and media litigation including defamation and privacy issues. |
Top 12 firm cards (with official links)
Each card is built only from what the firm and major legal directories publicly describe. Use these cards to shortlist, then verify fit on a short intake call.
Defamation litigation boutique that states it focuses on complex defamation matters and high-profile reputational attacks.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: plaintiff-side defamation and reputation management in high-profile settings.
- Use when: your matter is litigation-forward and reputational stakes are high.
- First-call question: “What is the safest escalation ladder over the next 2 to 6 weeks?”
Law firm that publicly describes services spanning internet defamation, online reputation management, and internet content removal.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: online harm, defamation, and removal strategy in internet-first disputes.
- Use when: you need process clarity around removal options and evidence handling for online claims.
- First-call question: “Which removal and legal paths apply to these URLs, and what evidence is missing?”
Practice page describes a team approach that includes attorneys and cyber-investigators, focused on content removal strategy for damaging online material.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: advising on “best removal strategy” for the situation, including difficult content removal issues.
- Use when: you need a structured decision tree for removal versus alternative responses.
- First-call question: “What is the lowest attention approach that still gets movement?”
Defamation and media litigation practice page describes work across defamation, invasion of privacy, rights of publicity, and related disputes.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: media and entertainment disputes where defamation and privacy issues intersect with publishing and content distribution.
- Use when: your case has serious media-law angles or you are a publisher, creator, or platform-adjacent organization.
- First-call question: “What is the defensive risk if we send a demand, and what can be said publicly without increasing exposure?”
Firm news and practice page describe a First Amendment and Free Expression practice, including advising on defamation risk and free expression disputes.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: free expression issues across sectors and jurisdictions, including defamation risk.
- Use when: the dispute is high exposure and tied to broader speech, media, or platform concerns.
- First-call question: “What is the legal and reputational risk tradeoff if we act quickly versus waiting?”
UK firm that publicly describes fast, practical advice on defamation, privacy, breach of confidence, data protection, harassment, and online reputation matters.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: claimant-side reputation and privacy disputes, plus online abuse and cross-border coordination.
- Use when: the center of gravity is UK or the publication and harm are cross-border.
- First-call question: “Which jurisdictional steps reduce risk and increase leverage?”
Firm describes a combined model spanning reputation, privacy, and security, and legal directory text highlights privacy breaches, defamation, harassment, and data misuse.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: high-stakes reputation and privacy issues with security and intelligence components.
- Use when: doxxing, harassment, intrusion, or coordinated campaigns are part of the picture.
- First-call question: “What evidence do you need to pursue removal, restraint, or safe communications?”
Practice page describes advising and litigating on media and communication law, including defamation, malicious falsehood, privacy, blackmail, harassment, and data protection.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: crisis-capable reputation protection with broad media law coverage.
- Use when: you need a firm comfortable with defamation plus privacy and harassment dynamics.
- First-call question: “What is the safest wording for any correction or demand to reduce attention risk?”
Practice page describes support for content clearance work and defamation and reputation management across publishing, broadcast, and regulatory contexts.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: defamation disputes plus “clearance” work such as libel reads and script review.
- Use when: publishing or broadcast is part of the story, or you need pre-publication risk guidance.
- First-call question: “If we publish a response, what is the defamation or privacy exposure?”
Service page describes protecting information, reputation, and security, including defamation, privacy, breach of confidence, data protection, harassment, and information law.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: information protection plus reputation management, often with global elements.
- Use when: private/confidential material, harassment, or data protection issues sit beside defamation.
- First-call question: “Can you map the legal options across defamation, privacy, and confidence without escalating attention?”
Practice page describes support for defamation and privacy complaints and contentious data protection, with robust defense in court when needed.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: defendant-focused media disputes covering defamation, privacy, and data protection issues.
- Use when: you are on the receiving end of a claim, or you need defense posture and risk containment.
- First-call question: “What do we stop doing immediately to reduce litigation and reputation exposure?”
Industry page describes entertainment and media litigation across regions, including defamation and privacy among other dispute types.
More detail for screening
- Public positioning: entertainment and media disputes, including defamation and privacy risks in content ecosystems.
- Use when: the dispute has media or entertainment angles, or spans multiple regions.
- First-call question: “How do we coordinate legal steps with content and communications so we do not amplify the story?”
Evidence pack checklist (copy this)
- One-page timeline: first appearance, edits, reposts, spikes, and any outreach you already did.
- URLs plus dated screenshots: the page, the search results view, and any social shares driving attention.
- Proof documents: records that support falsity or context (contracts, receipts, logs, emails).
- Harm summary: measurable impact (lost deal, threats, removal from a program, hiring impact).
- Goal statement: removal, correction, stop-harassment, defense, or quiet containment.
- Constraints: anonymity needs, budget range, and time sensitivity.
Simple estimator: starting lane
This is not legal advice. It helps you pick a sensible first call type.
