In online discourse, users often avoid direct accusations by implying defamatory meanings through indirect language. Social media platforms, particularly in Iraq, provide a space where individuals navigate defamation through implicit strategies, often violating conversational norms. This qualitative study investigates indirect defamation in Iraqi social media through the lens of Grice’s Conversational Implicature (1975). It hypothesizes that different Iraqi social media users engage in indirect defamation by violating Grice’s maxims in distinct ways, with frequently violations of Quality and Manner maxims and that figures of speech, particularly exaggeration and sarcasm, play a key role in conveying implicit defamatory meanings. Data were collected from public posts and comments on Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter), focusing on four distinct user categories: public figures with real identities, public figures with fake identities, anonymous pages/admins, and private individuals with few followers. Findings reveal that the maxim of Quality is the most frequently violated across all samples, followed by Relevance, while Manner and Quantity appears to be less frequently violated. These violations are often accompanied by figures of speech, particularly sarcasm, exaggeration, metonymy, and euphemism, shaping implicit defamatory meanings. Notably, public figures using real identities tend to employ metonymy and euphemism, while those with fake identities or limited public exposure rely on sarcasm and exaggeration.