[fesoliveira]

> The identities aren't even relevant to their respective stories.

I believe that depending on the situation and the individual or individuals allegedly responsible for these defamations, their identity might be very relevant. In the UK case, it seems it was someone noteworthy and rich enough that settling the case while paying 6 figures in damage was cheaper than the PR nightmare that would come with his identity being revealed.

Also, keep in mind that we live during times where cancel culture is raging very strong on social media, and people that make this claims can very easily lose their careers over stupid things they say online. I would say it is quite likely that the individuals themselves asked for anonymity in cases, and the attacked parties granted this so long as they don't repeat their behavior.

[easterncalculus]

I don't think the identity in this case is necessarily relevant. It certainly could be, but at the same time, I don't necessarily believe that people with this kind of money are already public figures. There are definitely still people that could scrounge up this kind of money, live on a couple hundred thousand dollars a year, and be private people.