This New York Times articles discusses the Website FakeYourSpace.com which essentially sells its clients “friends” on social networking sites like Friendster.com, Facebook.com, and MySpace.com. The fact that this service exists illustrates not only how ubiquitous and popular social networking sites are but also how important they are to users. People will actually pay to appear more popular to those who might be checking their profiles online. Clearly, these networking sites have become an integral part in the identity formation and subjectivity of their users. The reason that this particular site was in the news was because they used pictures (of the “fake” friends) without a license to do so. The photos came from iStockPhoto.com and that company asked the founder of FakeYourSpace.com, Brant Walker, to stop using their photos. He complied and the Website was only down for 4 days. This is not the only site of its kind, nor are these types of services restricted to online social networks. One can also pay a fee to have messages left on his cell phone from “friends.”This article highlights not only the interesting phenomenon of attractive “friends” on an online network increasing one’s value in the virtual and real world, but also the moral ramifications of such fakes. As long as the photographs are legally licensed, there are no legal problems, but the clients still have to see the falsity and superficiality of what they are doing. The service only costs 99 cents per month, so if it became popular enough (it already has 50,000 hits per month) , it ironically could actually negate the distinction between what the article calls, “cyberlosers” versus “social-networking magnets.” I wish the article had included quotes from actual users saying how they felt about the service (how frequently they use it/how many "fake" friends they have, how satisfied they are with it, do they feel it actually makes a difference in how their actual online friends perceive them).