Late 2017 saw the emergence of #MeToo, a social media-based campaign concerning sexual assault and harassment. #MeToo has resulted in several public statements from high-profile figures accused of transgressions ranging from inappropriate comments to outright assault. Such statements have frequently been treated in journalistic and social media as failed or absent apologies – as non-apologies. The present paper focuses on the mediated delivery of apologies and their receipt as non-apologies across traditional (broadcast and print) media and new social media. As empirical cases, we examine three media events from the global #MeToo movement: the Donald Trump “PussyGate” affair, a controversial joke about the Harvey Weinstein case by TV host James Corden, and public accusations of sexual harrassment leveled against a well-known Swedish TV show host. We specifically focus on the grounds for rejecting apologies by examining how the apology was 1)designed and launched, and 2) interpreted and assessed in media/social media. Using conversation analysis (CA) (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1974; Clayman & Heritage, 2002) and textual discourse analysis, we demonstrate how responses orient to selected aspects of the apology in assessing it, such as blame-shifting, trivialization, accounts of intentions, or conditionalization. By examining the original apologies in their sequential and discursive contexts (e.g. Robinson, 2004; Drew et al, 2016), and contrasting their composition and delivery with the grounds for rejection brought forth in reactions, the study aims to enhance our understanding of the social delicacy of public apologizing and the selective recontextualization of such apologies in receipts and rejections.