🔗 Share this article

"A significant portion of my life is saved on Snapchat, and suddenly they expect us to fork out money for it."

One-star reviews and a feeling of injustice have dominated online discussion since the messaging service joined the newest technology company to start charging for a function that users previously accessed for at no cost.

The company behind Snapchat revealed in the fall that it would begin imposing fees subscribers if they have over five gigabytes worth of saved images and videos stored as Memories.

In the eyes of countless individuals, these past uploads serve as a portal to bygone days – prompting some to criticize the firm of "corporate greed" in messages on online platforms and negative reviews on Google and Apple's app stores.

Available Solutions

The company has equated its subscription options to those provided by Apple and Google for smartphones.

And as an alternative for those who don't want to pay, subscribers can download their saved content – which for certain users span large volumes – to their personal gadget.

The company indicated that only a small number of members would be affected by the changes.

They recognized that it was "inherently difficult to transition from receiving a service for free to covering the expense" – but suggested it would be "justified by the benefits" for users.

Numerous criticising the decision online seem to disagree.

Widespread Discontent

A web-based protest dubbed the fee a "memory tax", with participants labeling it "Orwellian" and "ridiculous" – while one person vowed never to use the app again.

In parallel, in a negative evaluation on the digital platform, a person named a pseudonymous user said it felt "deeply unfair".

"As a member of that generation, most of us have extensive archives of personal moments on this service," they said. "And most of us only remained on the platform mainly for this purpose. Five gigabytes is insufficient when you have years worth of recordings... Farewell Snapchat."

Additionally, a journalism student, a young adult media studies major in the UK capital, revealed on the video platform her plans to uninstall the app.

"I made up my mind that I had to save all my memories as immediately," she mentioned. "Nearly every part of my teenage years have been recorded through my saved snaps, all of the pictures in there are extremely valuable to me."

"This seems illogical to start charging people for a service that has been free for a considerable period."

Unknown Fees

The company has not disclosed how much premium options would require in the United Kingdom – only that they are part of a "phased international launch".

But a young adult another user, who also lives in the city, commented in a post on the video service that she would be "devastated" by such charges.

Amber noted that the platform had become "integrated into daily routine" since she began accessing it in 2014.

While she said she accepted the service needed to earn income, the user suggested that the Memories feature means more to users than the firm may have realized.

"I think it's quite an unfair move to impose fees on your customers who have been faithful and dedicated," she commented. "These aren't just called Memories, these are our real-life recollections."

Expert Analysis

Businesses opting to impose fees from customers for a service that was previously free is a common practice, and numerous people pay for platforms like digital backup services to backup their photos and videos from their smartphone.

The fact of archiving content in the digital storage – which various commentators in the tech industry often describe as simply "an external server" – is that it requires funding.

"Managing vast amounts of saved content on the platform demands considerable investment," online expert Matt Navarra explained. "The company has to attempt to identify a way to offset the expenses of archiving, bandwidth, duplicates, file sharing, encryption – everything involved."

But the expert noted that requiring payment for a feature that had earlier required no payment, and subscribers had been invited to access as such, may seem like a "deceptive practice" for many people.

"Moving the goalposts after people have created this huge digital archive seems unfair," he said. And for many, he stated, "Archived media exceeds mere information, they're sentimental records."

The sentiment was reflected by those posting negative feedback, with one person calling their archived media "extremely valuable to me".

"The stored media includes all elements of my experiences within them from celebrations of new family members' births, grieving for lost relatives, times spent with loved ones, [and] my complete adolescence," they wrote.

Academic Insight

An academic expert, a postdoctoral researcher at Utrecht University in the the Low Countries, stated that the platform's decision shows the consequences of commercial platforms being used to store sentimental personal content.

"The companies profit from this reliance, mutual reliance, and assumption of perpetual availability, which even motivates many people to continue using the app or keep accessing it in order to revisit their archive," she told the media. "But these are not altruistic protectors of private remembrance."