Catherine Cronenberg

- A look at the trend "cow pooling" where a community comes together to make the most out of one animal.

Here's a brief look at what you're in for:

And the whole story is...:

Pip Abrigo is an admittedly unlikely character for running a beef company, but he hung up his Broadway dancing shoes and started singing a different tune after he and his wife began a family. Having children made him consider more carefully how chemicals and hormones in foods they ate affected their health, and awakened Abrigo's passion for public health issues. In November of 2008, his concern prompted him to become involved in increasing the availability of higher-quality foods. As a co-founder of healthyandliving.org, Abrigo helps provide healthier, grass-fed beef products by acting as an intermediary between consumers and community supported ranchers in a practice nicknamed cow pooling.

Whole Foods, Trader Joes, and smaller, luxury food markets, which have become extremely successful in the United States, center on providing healthier organic, sustainable, non-endangered foods to their customers. Some restaurants have started serving only sustainably or organically produced. But passionate individuals have taken their beef with supermarket beef to a greater level, uniting in cow pooling rings. Will this become the American norm?

GETTING INTO THE COW POOLING LANE:

Cow pooling has been popping up on lifestyle and social networking sites, as well as in blogs and traditional publications. The term cow pooling, describes the modern trend of sharing a cow purchased directly from a rancher. Developing a relationship with the rancher or liaison helps consumers to understand where their meat is coming from.

The process of cow pooling, from ranch to table, begins when a grass-fed beef supplier, normally a small, family-owned ranch, receives an order from a group of people often represented by a coordinator. Most often, buyers receive beef packages directly from a USDA-certified processing house, or the rancher's facility.

Some participate because this food source gives cattle the best quality of life. Grain and other alternative food sources not naturally digestible by cows produce gas, which causes the animals pain. Others cow pool with their money because it lowers product and shipping costs. However, while cow pooling may offer a cheaper solution than grass-fed beef in the supermarket, the price is still significantly higher than conventional beef. But Abrigo said, "Customers come mainly because they know what healthy meat can bring to their lives."

Beth Griffiths has worn several hats in the culinary field. After graduating from culinary school she was employed as a cheese monger, butcher, fish monger, wine distributor, wine merchant, and in every imaginable restaurant position. Now that she serves as director of marketing and communications for Real Food Daily, a restaurant centered on organic, vegetarian cuisine, Griffiths said that she sees how eating purer food impacts people's health and well-being. "Having worked in restaurants and food establishments that rely on a lot of butter and meat-driven products versus having worked in vegan restaurants, you can definitely see a difference." When speaking of her own eating preferences, Griffiths said, "I don't eat processed foods... eating colors found in nature is a pretty good rule of thumb."

Research shows that highly processed meats, like hot dogs, pose the greatest cancer and heart disease health risks. Large agricultural businesses house cattle in feedlots in order to fatten the animals. They do this using growth hormones 80 percent of the time, and through food substances other than natural grass, including at times other animal byproducts. Because the living situation is tight, antibiotics protect the animals from diseases that breed on the build-up of manure.

But, in grass-fed beef, there is no color added; No synthetic growth hormones and antibiotics are allowed. Grass-fed classification requires that the animal maintain a 99 percent or higher diet of grass, although it may receive mineral and vitamin supplementation. Grass-fed beef has higher protein and omega-3 fatty acid content. It is also leaner than corn-fed beef.

Abrigo's partner ranch, Dave Reynold's Ranch, ensures that cattle to go to pasture for 100 percent of their development. This is an important distinction because a rancher's claim that cattle are grass-fed is misleading if cattle spent time on a feedlot because they may have consumed other products mixed with the grass. He contends pasture grazing reduces cows' stress, which enables better beef.

Grass-fed beef, because of a higher iron count, tends to have a gamier, more metallic flavor than conventional beef. Griffiths said, "If you're looking for a pure flavor and a more traditional heritage style of beef, then go with grass fed beef as opposed to choosing the traditional, corn-fed beef, which through the industrial farming industry has become this bland, overly fatty, overly rich product that doesn't necessarily reflect the true nature of the beef itself." One poster to a food forum from the site Craigslist said, "The steaks do taste noticeably better...but I find the fat to be a little gamey, which gives the hamburger a distinctive taste."

THE BEEF WITH THIS BEEF:

Perhaps online forum poster Texswife was wise when she commented, "If I were to cow pool, I would do it with strangers and not friends. It seems someone always gets their nose out of joint when things get divided." However, when going through an intermediary, like Abrigo, customers avoid fighting over cuts because they cannot choose. Abrigo said there has to be a standardized method of dividing the meat because it is cost and resource prohibitive to allow customers to select their cuts of meat. But, a one-size-fits-all solution does not necessarily leave all consumers happy.

As the cheeky name indicates, buying beef through cow pooling requires the same patience and added time for receiving meat as driving to a destination in the slow lane would. After a customer purchases the cow, there is no way of precisely determining the timeframe until the cow is ready for slaughter.

Customers must also wait their turn until a cow is available. Grass-fed cattle cannot ingest steroids, hormones, antibiotics, or grain to inflate and fatten more quickly than it would naturally develop, and because they require pasture, ranchers cannot house nearly as many animals on the land as a feedlot would. At Heirloom Country Farms, another sustainable cow pooling supplier, Katharine Lune said, "We wish we had 10 times the volume ability, but we're getting there." Then, the meat must be shipped, delivered or picked up.

If the ranch does not package the meat like Abrigo's partner ranch does, customers will encounter the added time of having the side or quarter of the animal butchered themselves. Online forum poster Gassygal said, "My butcher had no idea when I was going to get the beef. Turned out it took a month and a half including aging." As a result, customers complained that a large window for receiving the meat can be frustrating.

Once the beef does arrive, customers must freeze it until it can be used, which may affect both taste and tenderness, in order to keep it from rotting. Abrigo's cow poolers, for example, receive 21 standard cuts in each package, which most customers would not be able to consume fresh. Kevin Thom, a Canadian citizen interested in the practice, said that he didn't mind. "As long as the beef was properly prepared, vacuum sealed and frozen, it should be fine," Thom said, not taking issue with the space required to store a bulk quantity of beef. "If I were to get a large order like that, I'd just keep it in a chest freezer," Thom said. However, for city dwellers, accustomed to smaller living spaces, storage is more of an issue.

Price is a significant detriment to sales across the grass-fed market, regardless of cow pooling or store purchases.  Online forum poster Gassygal said, "One problem is it is hard to budget for, could be $500 could be $1000 for a quarter, because you don't know until your cow is processed." In a store, the average price of grass-fed beef per pound is between $8 and $25, depending on the cut, without the cost of shipping. Abrigo's share packages contain about 10 lbs. of beef for $10.60, including shipping. But, for those who cannot afford these prices, there is little in the way of options. 

While beef raised by sustainable ranchers improves upon most environmental issues, this practice has received negative press for methane production and the carbon footprint of shipping food. In the long run, Abrigo said, "That's why local operation is a must." Heirloom Country Farms does operate locally only, and will not ship to consumers, in order to reduce their footprint. But, Griffiths said, "The truth of the matter is that eating meat and dairy is so unsustainable so that at that point if you're going to start talking about food miles, get a biodiesel truck, because really the impact comes from eating beef and eating dairy."

PASSION ACROSS THE MESSAGE BOARD:

"Grass-fed beef has more passionate and philosophically dedicated individuals making that commitment...so you have people who aren't integrating the unsustainable practices that are taking over the main stream corn fed beef industry," Griffiths said.

And in some cases, that passion should not be underestimated. Members of the food forum on the community website Craigslist demonstrated comprehensive knowledge on and fervor for cow pooling. Whether interested in the practice for environmental or health reasons--or foodie bragging rights--those that posted inquiries on the subject evoked both positive and negative comments over the conversation threads. The tone of language used quickly escalated in strength, with posters displaying anger and urging others to become more educated before making assumptions about either grass-fed or conventional beef.  Debate about the practice eventually became so heated that profanity and personal insults replaced the information sharing that had initiated the string of conversation.     

HOW SUSTAINABLE WILL SUSTAINABLE RANCHING PROVE?

Only Abrigo indicated optimism that the movement could grow beyond the passionate contingent to become a force for change within the industry. "Resetting the consumer mindset poses the greatest challenge," Abrigo said. He hopes that better education on the social, environmental and health benefits around this type of beef will be incentive enough for consumers to break from their normal buying patterns and opt for the less traditional, direct-from-ranch purchase style and propagate user demand in the years to come.

Consumers like Thom had not yet tried grass-fed beef, but after learning about the dairy cow pooling, he educated himself on the difference between grass-fed and conventional beef. Thom said, "It appeals to me because it seems cleaner and more natural than industrially farmed beef." However, deep discounts advertised on rancher websites are evidence of how the recessed economy has made it challenging for them to find customers willing to pay the premium price for sustainably raised beef.

Part of what keeps the price of beef high is that small, family-owned sustainable ranching operations do not receive government subsidies. Federal money is divvied up among large corporate agriculture companies. Even with the elevated price, Abrigo's partner, Dave Reynolds Ranch, makes only about $1.50 profit per pound after subtracting all costs of raising the cattle. "The only way to solve these issues is for the federal government to step in and financially support the movement like they support the big giant agribusinesses," Abrigo said.

Abrigo said that the U.S. beef industry is so powerful that he does not envision cow pooling and other sustainable agriculture practices overtaking mainstream companies' market share anytime soon. Abrigo is also concerned that special interest groups will apply pressure on the USDA to impose regulations that would make it difficult for sustainable farmers and ranchers to stay in business.

Griffiths agreed that money should be diverted away from large industrialized farms. "It's absolutely investing tax payer dollars in an unsustainable practice that means our tax money is going to the degradation of America's farm land, and it's a shame," Griffiths said. "It makes it so that you can buy a 99 cent hamburger at McDonalds, but I don't know that that's necessarily the direction that we should be moving in."

However, Griffiths indicated that the government-farming relationship was getting better. "The FDA is making huge movements to support farmers markets across the country--they're accepting food stamps now. I mean that's a big step in the right direction," Griffiths said. "But without any assistance from the government there's really no way to make it cost less because their cost of production really is higher. If our national priority was to make it easier for sustainable farmers to continue their practices then maybe they could pass those savings on."

Abrigo maintained that the only way to send a message to cattle growers and effect significant change in the meat industry is through consumer demand. But, Griffiths said that it comes down to a chicken and egg problem of whether demand or supply will come first. Griffiths said, "The only way this will happen is for consumers to get out there and say this is a product that we want, that we will support our preferences with our dollar, and will support with our purchases the sustainable farming practices." Right now, with the recessed economy, finding consumers willing to support the cost is a tough for ranchers.  

But, there is little opportunity to support these products at the supermarket, as grass-fed beef has limited availability in grocery stores. Whole Foods public relations representative Brenda Lynch said that the grocery chain was not a good source to speak about how the cow pooling movement would affect the health food meat industry and declined to comment on their grass-fed beef offering. Vons and Trader Joe's markets also declined to comment. The fact that the trend seems not to have reached the radar of larger supermarket chains, even those that pride themselves for offering healthier food alternatives, indicates that the direct-to-consumer organic beef market is not yet a threat to conventional store sales.

In actuality, most consumers are not ready to try cow pooling, and will continue purchase the cheaper, readily available conventional beef. Louis Friedel said that he would never try cow pooling. "I believe in the free market's ability to provide me with the best quality meat at the best price and I am extremely confident that the net result of cow pooling would be an increased cost to the end consumer for what amounts to equal quality or more likely inferior quality meat," Friedel said. He is not afraid of hormone or antibiotic use. Friedel does not believe in organic meats or produce and is unsure of the purported benefits of grass-fed beef.

Even if the practice does not become widespread, it will likely continue as long as ranchers are willing to sell to consumers. "I think that there will remain a group of people who are interested in good food and knowing where it comes from. They'll always be interested in going the extra mile to get what they want," Thom said.

"These systems are a great opportunity to support farmers in a way that has really been lost by most of our society, most of our consumers today," Griffiths said.

Abrigo simply hopes to leave his daughters with a healthier food supply than the one he inherited.

 

On a typical morning, Brenden McEneaney starts with a cup of coffee, steps out his front door and commutes to work like everyone else. The difference is that his vehicle doesn't have any cup holders. McEneaney's address in Santa Monica allows him to ride his bicycle the few blocks to work.

McEneaney has run the Green Building Program for the City of Santa Monica since April of 2007. His position is unique because he operates in Santa Monica, a city that LA County attempts to emulate, in a state that leads the burgeoning green movement nationally. At only 29 years of age, he is at the forefront of the still-emerging field. "There really aren't too many people who have done this yet, even now. There are very few cities that have someone in my role... A lot of people who have been successful started this in their mid-thirties or forties and are into retirement now," McEneaney said. "It really is a next generation role for people who have grown up with the mindset of changes in this direction." His last major policy concerned changes in landscape water use, "no one wanted to put a restriction on single family homes, but we said no more because we're in a drought."

Experts in the environmental field, like McEneaney, have recently voiced concern about America falling behind in green technologies development, "China has probably 18 of the 20 most polluted cities, but they're actually leap-frogging us in terms of their technologies development." He and others with an eye on the United Nations conference on climate change in Copenhagen are hopeful that the new administration will positively impact global policies, "They are going to green the White House and get it LEED certified...I think everybody is getting better signals from the change in the White House." He supports the national movement by providing examples of successful ventures, "I'm more involved in how do we get from here to there...and we're gonna continue to lead by example anyway."

He divides his 7:30am to 5:30pm days into, "a half an hour here, an hour there, 15 minutes here," across ten to 15 projects at a given time. His responsibilities are split between policy decision making, as he sets requirements for new construction in the city and its environmental impact, and educational outreach on those policies and environmental technologies.

McEneaney didn't always want to work in Environmental policy. When they held career day in kindergarten, he went as a mailman. The first time he looked at the idea of green building was during his master's thesis at Yale University's School of Forestry, "It wasn't that I cared about the environment and wanted to do this with my life, but once I had picked that major, it was important to me to have some other larger purpose to be working for." McEneaney wanted to help shape how we build our future, "At some point we just have to say, 'you have to do this.' And that's why I'm glad I'm on the policy side of this. I see that trend now going on nationwide--the writing's on the wall." In the future he would like to help, "reduce impact to beyond zero, so that people create more energy that they use in a year...to build structures that actually improve our quality of life." He is also on the board of the LA chapter for the US Green Building Council. He will likely continue his career in environmental policy at a higher government level, but he admits that the real, expedited impact of the commercial sector is appealing to him.

The majority of his friends display their concern for environmental issues when around him, "Recycling is a big one...whenever I'm around they kinda make a big show." He acknowledged that he eats meat and flies home to Dover, New Hampshire without offsetting his carbon footprint. But Jasleen Ahuja, a friend, said, "McEneaney lives an active, sustainable lifestyle in Santa Monica; not only does he make buildings greener at work, he helps make Santa Monica greener place."

 *Photo from www.usgbc-la.org

Voters across Maine turned out in support of Propostion 1 on Tuesday, passing the measure to repeal the gay marriage rights act by a narrow margin. According to AP, the measure passed with 53 percent of the vote. Each time the issue is voted upon, it offers an opportunity for individuals to reconsider their position and instigates a larger re-evaluation of the national sentiment towards gay marriage. For Many, the passing of the vote to repeal the act signifies a larger defeat in the process towards equal rights in this area. In West Hollywood, a recognized gay-friendly community, the defeat harkens back to California's Proposition 8, through which gay marriage was voted against just over a year ago.

Gary Broeker said that the repeal vote, "Reinforces the fact that the opposition is getting what they want."

Keith Kohn said, "It's time that people really step forward this time nationally and speak their minds. The government wants our money but they won't give us our rights, and that's why I find it unfair."

Martin Osborne echoed Kohn's sentiments, and said that financial incentives in the legal system are to blame for what he describes as the punishment of not being allowed to wed.

Osborne also said that religious beliefs and misunderstandings are at the root of what he argues is poorly informed decision making.

Attention to the issue of gay marriage has led many to question whether the government has a right to legislate on the issue at all. "I don't think the government should care what happens in people's bedrooms as long as it's between two consenting adults," Kakone said. Ray Lie does not feel that there should be a law, but feels instead that gay marriage, "should just be accepted." However, Broeker said, "I think it's important. I believe that we're all entitled to the same rights, so I would hope it's passed everywhere."

Social networking sites have been forums for disseminating information and for speaking out against or in favor of equal rights.

Facebook users posted showed strong opinions indicating disappointment and frustration or celebration after the Proposition 1 victory.

Before the repeal, Maine was the fifth state to allow gay marriage. The four, predominantly New England states that currently allow same-sex nuptials, Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa and Massachusetts, have earned the region a reputation for nationally progressive legislature regarding equal rights. New Hampshire will allow same-sex marriage on January 1, 2010. News outlets noted surprise and a halt to momentum for the movement given Tuesday's events, especially considering the large amount of advertising dollars in opposition to the repeal.

No one interviewed spoke in favor of the repeal or government intervention in marriage rights. While the reason for opinion or voting choice varies by individual, one seemingly universal response was that the issue is not going to go away anytime soon.

The typical evening, in photos, for a group of friends connected through Jonathan Nelson.




Warming up for the evening with some drinks, dancing and jokes.













Running with cell phones; getting to the party on time--fashionably late that is.

The promenade at Venice Beach offers a little something for everyone. The strand adjacent to Venice's Beach is a haven for leisure activities.

Shops pour out onto the sidewalks with an array of goods from luxury to handmade, from kitschy to classic--or just plain eccentric. 

Local artist often depict the Santa Monica and Venice scapes and ocean side scenes, and offer different styles for a range of tastes.

You can find everything from Gucci shades and original artwork to "I love beer" t-shirts and preserved insects.

This is a great place to come for a stroll, but it won't be a quiet one.

Reggae and hip hop pour out from each storefront or sidewalk vendor and mingle to create a cacophony of musical backgrounds.

Vendors urge you to peruse their products, psychics offer to reveal your fortunes, young artists approach you about their newest tracks and thrust a CD towards your hands, skateboarders whiz by, and representatives from medical marijuana offices and pizza parlors tout their products' prices and quality as pedestrians laugh, cry and carry on various conversations.  

 

Infamous for its "Muscle Beach" gym roots, where Governor Schwarzenegger built and toned his Terminator stature, this area offers no shortage in physical activity options.

From skate parks and paddle tennis courts to 693paths and beach cruiser rental shops from surfing waves to volleyball sand courts, there's something for the old and young alike.

Parking lots are home to the occasional organized roller hockey games, and parks often host Frisbee or kickball tournaments, which have become increasingly popular through the creation of  organized leagues throughout LA.

 

It's an ideal place for people-watchers, as it's home to a kaleidoscope of personalities, from tourists to locals and incognito celebrities to downright unusual characters.

Cafes that line the walkway offer food and beverage refreshment to barely sun-kissed and leather-skinned patrons alike, whether they're relaxing on terraces or in boisterous beer gardens.

Performance artists display their skills and put on shows.

Homeless people solicit money, sometimes employing uncanny or clever methods, or just come to rest their legs and spend their days.

Any day you come, there's plenty going on in Venice.

Privacy is a major issue for everyone in the modern, wired era. With the increasingly popular and conveniently mobile capturing tools, such as cell phone pictures and videos, and the online outlets for publicly disseminating materials, including user-generated content sites like "you tube" and social networking pages like "Facebook", there is truly no hiding anymore. Material may go far past the intended audience, and leave unsuspecting users completely embarrassed and exposed.

Even those who are accustomed to being "on" are running into problems due to inexperience with or underestimation of the power of new technologies. Renowned journalists have been exposed for gaffs that would have never been recognized generations ago. This is for two reasons; one--we've actually got them on camera, and two--we are much more open to invading people's privacy than ever before. There are no take-backs online and with mobile technologies--once it's out there it's out there. Because they are public figures who are expected to be models of full disclosure, journalists must understand that public life as they know it is over.

Sure, there are the now-traditional sites like IMDB and Wikipedia which house career and personal biographies for media. You can find all the relevant information about family, schooling, volunteerism, career--even in which neighborhood Ann Curry currently resides in NYC. But, there are also the evolving forms of reporting, such as citizen journalists and bloggers and twitterers and homemade websites that sit in wait to expose scandal or discuss celebrity events. Take Perez Hilton for example; his blog was written-off as insignificant until he started to seriously impact the careers of those he wrote about. In every aspect of public communication, now more than ever, journalists must take care in presenting themselves with a professional and neutral tone.

Ann Curry is a journalist adored by much of the public. She's earned reporting gravitas from hosting "DatelineNBC" and substituting for Brian Williams on "NBC Nightly News", but she's also maintained a measure of her human playfulness and optimistic spirit through her hosting position on "The Today Show". Still, despite kind nature on screen, here position in the public eye makes her vulnerable to attacks from anyone--whether from someone armed with a keyboard or a camera. The average person doesn't truly understand the difficulty of producing a flawless live news broadcast--which is probably why there seldom, if ever, is one.  Joel McHale, famous for his pop-culture commentating on the E! channel, is quick to point out Curry's mistakes in her broadcasts, which could potentially hurt her credibility with viewers.

However, the possible harm McHale's humorous TV commentary could cause is dwarfed in comparison to the potential for Internet users to unearth all types of information. Whether bored in a cubicle or curious about a first date, "Googling" friends, family and acquaintances has become a fun pastime for many. If we typed in a friend's name along with the word scandal into the search bar, most likely no shocking results would be found--although, you may be surprised. But with Ann Curry, even a harmless comment may balloon into an unintended and embarrassing episode. The blog site Nerve.com reported that "Ann Curry wanted to be photographed for More without makeup. Then she had an idea about rolling around in front of a camera wearing nothing but a sheet, which sent her NBC handlers into a tailspin - 'No naked pictures!' her publicist said repeatedly." Curry was also relentlessly mocked in blogs after she touched Brad Pitt's face during an interview for the Cannes Film Festival. 

Facebook has multiple sites and groups devoted to Curry. Some were positive, and some... not so positive, like "Ann Curry is Hot" and  "Ann Curry Sucks". While it may appear at first to be complimentary, objectifying Curry's physical image may ultimately detract from her credibility as a journalist. The "Ann Curry Sucks" group had 59 members and had this to say in its profile, "The today show is no longer news. It's an on air tabloid, and no one on the screen is more annoying than that goddamned Ann Curry. She asks the most obvious and redundant questions, she always adds her (myopic) opinion to a story. And I bet she's a crappy driver." Most people who posted on this page complained about her general tone and the emotional quality of her interviews for "The Today Show". Michael Rosen said, "Most irritating, though, by far, is the superficial emotion she can conjure up, and then when it is time to segue into the next story or news item, she quickly sheds the mood of her prior story." Nancy Levine echoed these sentiments, "She's so cloyingly sweet I now have diabetes."

On the same site, Erin Hogan and several others criticized her competence as a journalist, "One of the many interviews done by Ann Curry that make me cringe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0_aU3gdzSY." Rosen again said, "Before the guest can say anthing (sic), she can ask several questions, give us her personal thoughts and opinions, change subjects, and then summarize it all, with a real question, of her guest. I think she does it to buy time, as she tries to think of the next question to ask."

One site reported that Curry's family was disgusted by her public persona, "Perhaps most dismayed by Curry's behavior are her parents, who say they wonder what they possibly could have done to turn their daughter into the embarrassment that she has become."

But despite the opinionated public--and let's face it, you can't please everyone--Curry is relatively unscathed by Internet dirt, especially compared to some of her co-hosts. Searches across several sites and engines produced almost no gossip or scandal, aside from individuals' opinions on her work or her sentimentality. This is probably because NBC employs a public relations specialist to manage and craft Curry's external communications to ensure they present her in the best possible light. But, also signifies that she probably hasn't done anything "wrong" enough to write about. It's obvious that there are people who seek to tear her down, so they would have latched-on to anything they could expose her with in a heartbeat. Maybe Curry understood the importance of public image early, like a politician who stays away from torrid affairs and doesn't embezzle money or give government contracts to cronies.

Another site brought an incident where Curry bent the law for her own purposes to light, "Ann has also had her share of bad press over her repeated on-air gaffes and the illegal and disruptive renovations of her New York brownstone." But, it fails to elaborate any further on exactly how the renovations were illegal. On the same site, one commentator posted, "Her one sided liberal slant was a little too obvious. She's asking Rick to defend his agreeing to accept the honor of doing the invocation at Obama's inauguration. Just because he doesn't support gay marriage, she portraits him as some kind of hate mongering homophobe. Talk about someone who doesn't respect divergent opinions. Ann Curry's bias was embarrassing...Ann and her gay rights activist buddies need to practice more tolerance of others if they want more themselves." I haven't been able to dig up much suggesting that Curry has a gross liberal slant. She does participate in some charitable organizations, including: Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation, Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, Americares, Save the Children, Médecins Sans Frontières, and Airline Ambassadors. She also has a scholarship in her name at her alma mater, the University of Oregon. But she is disclosing her participation with these organizations, and they don't seem to have much political slant on the surface.

Regardless of what was or wasn't found on Curry, there is one main quandary which when digging up any information warrants consideration--Can we trust the source? How much weight do you give someone who is just throwing out opinion, hiding behind aliases, unaffiliated with a media organization, and potentially just promoting their own agenda? Personally, I don't lend much credibility to unaccredited sources, but that's not to say that the information they put out doesn't taint my overall impression of the person in question. Perhaps our own moral compass and skepticism is and will continue to be the only safeguard we have against material that's published in this cyberspace landscape that is increasingly difficult to regulate.