The Team Behind Jeffrey Epstein’s Digital Cleanup

In the midst of mingling with high-profile figures and engaging in unspeakable acts, Jeffrey Epstein seemed to have a keen interest in managing his online reputation. A series of documents reveal that he frequently reached out to associates, expressing frustration over the negative information about his criminal activities that appeared in search results.

> “I want the Google page cleaned” (November 5, 2010)
> “Mike, can you clean up my wiki page?” (April 18, 2011)
> “Any way to clean up my wiki page?” (September 17, 2013)

Epstein often directed his concerns to Al Seckel, a fixer who appeared repeatedly in Epstein’s files, promising to suppress articles and other content that highlighted his abuses. However, Seckel wasn’t working alone. The documents indicate that a network of individuals—including SEO experts, scientific contacts, and even casual acquaintances—collaborated to obscure Epstein’s past whenever someone searched for him online. Even after Epstein’s guilty plea for procuring a child for prostitution, which registered him as a sex offender, his associates continued to assist him, and reputation management firms were willing to take him on as a client. While reputation management is a common public relations strategy, in Epstein’s case, the agencies involved were likely aware of the very abuses they were hired to downplay.

In October 2010, Seckel outlined a strategy to bolster Epstein’s online image. He noted that a search yielded “over 75+ pages of derogatory material,” making it difficult to find any positive references. To counteract the overwhelmingly negative perception, Seckel proposed flooding the internet with controlled content, specifically by creating websites that highlighted Epstein’s connections to science and charitable endeavors. Seckel would lead the effort without pay, alongside other unpaid consultants. A man named Michael Keesling was set to receive $25,000 to acquire and host web domains, hire a “Philippine Crew” to disseminate favorable links, and perform other tasks. An unidentified group of “hackers” was to be compensated $2,500, while a “Stephanie Horenstein (Fred Horenstein)” would also receive $2,500 for posting positive comments on articles about Epstein.

During this period, discussions arose about editing Epstein’s Wikipedia page to remove references to his status as a sex offender and pedophile, replacing his mugshot with more flattering images, and suppressing unfavorable news articles. The documents include several wire transfers to Keesling totaling $22,500, and Keesling also mentioned receiving “over [$20,000] in cash” from Seckel without any receipts.

By 2013, Epstein was on the lookout for another “good reverse [SEO] person,” as he noted in an email, and was referred to someone named Tyler Shears. Within weeks, Shears presented a 30-day plan, charging $125 per hour, which included strategies like enhancing content related to a different Jeffrey Epstein to help mitigate negative search results. By February 2014, Epstein’s accountant reported that Shears had billed over $50,000, and Epstein was uncertain about the effectiveness of the changes.

Epstein also explored various reputation management firms and faced multiple rejections. In 2010, Seckel shared an exchange with a firm called Infuse Creative, which expressed reluctance to work with Epstein due to the serious nature of the allegations against him. “We have no problem helping someone who is innocent of accusations or a true victim of circumstance, but if there is truth to these allegations and the conviction, I’m afraid we’d have to pass,” the firm’s founder wrote.

Another associate informed Epstein that Reputation.com couldn’t take him on “because of [his] background,” but another firm, Integrity Defenders, was willing to assist (the files also include a paid invoice for $2,449 from Integrity Defenders). An account manager at Integrity Defenders advised, “Please ask him or anyone else not to click on any of the negative links EVER again as that can keep them lingering on the first page.” The website for Integrity Defenders is currently inactive, and attempts to contact the company were unsuccessful.

In the effort to conceal Epstein’s crimes online, numerous individuals—both paid and unpaid, knowingly or unknowingly—contributed to the whitewashing. In 2010, after Seckel and his team created websites emphasizing Epstein’s scientific and philanthropic ties to overshadow negative media coverage, Seckel began reaching out to acquaintances for favors. He asked them to link to Epstein’s sites from their own platforms. Seckel targeted scientists from UCLA and various physicists, aiming to leverage links from reputable sources to signal to Google that Epstein’s new sites deserved higher visibility in search results.

One of the acquaintances who agreed to help was Mark Tramo, an adjunct professor at UCLA, who claimed he had “not heard anything [about] statutory rape or minors being involved.” In 2010, Tramo was quick to support Seckel’s request for links, expressing enthusiasm for the “splendid ideas” and highlighting the “support” Epstein had provided for his work. Seckel later noted that “links all over the world and at major institutions [were] going up.” Even after Epstein’s guilty plea, the industry he infiltrated continued to perpetuate the facade.