🔗 Share this article

"Half of my experiences is stored on the platform, and suddenly they demand us to pay for it."

Poor ratings and a perception of injustice have flooded digital forums since the messaging service became the most recent technology company to put a price tag on a function that individuals previously accessed for free.

The company behind Snapchat declared in September that it would start charging subscribers if they have over five gigabytes worth of archived photos and videos stored as the Memories feature.

For many, these old snaps serve as a window to the past – leading some to blast the corporation of "profit-driven motives" in messages on digital networks and negative ratings on digital storefronts.

Other Choices

Snap has equated its premium storage tiers to those offered by major companies for smartphones.

For those seeking another option for individuals avoiding fees, users may save their archived media – which for certain users span tens of gigabytes – to their personal gadget.

The firm indicated that only a limited group of users would be impacted by the changes.

It also acknowledged that it was "always challenging to shift from receiving a service for free to paying for it" – but suggested it would be "worth the cost" for users.

Many denouncing the move on the internet clearly oppose this view.

User Backlash

An online petition labeled the fee a "memory tax", with users labeling it "Orwellian" and "outrageous" – while one person threatened never to use the app again.

Meanwhile, in a one-star evaluation on the Google Play store, a person identifying as a pseudonymous user said it felt "deeply unfair".

"As a member of that generation, the majority have extensive archives of memories on this service," they commented. "And most of us only remained on the platform mostly for this purpose. 5GB is absolutely nothing when you have extensive collections of recordings... Farewell Snapchat."

Furthermore, a London-based user, a 20-year-old aspiring reporter in London, shared on a social network her intention to remove the application.

"I concluded that I needed to download all my archived media as quickly as possible," she explained. "The vast majority of my teenage years have been documented through my saved snaps, all of the photos in there are extremely valuable to me."

"The decision appears unreasonable to demand payment people for a feature that has been complimentary for a considerable period."

Unknown Fees

Snapchat has not disclosed how much storage plans would require in the United Kingdom – only that they are part of a "phased international launch".

Yet a young adult another user, who is based in London, said in a post on the video service that she would be "upset" by such charges.

The user noted that the platform had become "integrated into daily routine" since she started using it in 2014.

While she said she accepted the service needed to earn income, the user suggested that the saved content option holds greater significance than the company may have anticipated.

"Personally, I believe it's a somewhat inequitable step to charge your customers who have been loyal and devoted," she explained. "These aren't just called Memories, these are our genuine personal moments."

Expert Analysis

Firms opting to impose fees from subscribers for a function that was previously free is a frequent occurrence, and millions pay for options like iCloud and Google Drive to save their media content from their mobile device.

The truth of storing data in the online servers – which various commentators in the tech industry often describe as merely "somebody else's computer" – is that it costs money.

"Hosting enormous quantities of archived media on the service isn't a trivial amount," digital strategist a tech commentator commented. "The platform has to try to find a method to fund the operation of data retention, bandwidth, back-ups, file sharing, data protection – the entire process."

Yet the expert noted that introducing fees for a feature that had once been complimentary, and subscribers had been invited to access as such, may seem like a "bait and switch" for certain individuals.

"Moving the goalposts after people have created this massive online collection feels inappropriate," he said. In the view of countless individuals, he stated, "Saved content is more than stored files, they're personal mementos."

The feeling was reflected by those leaving negative feedback, with one person labeling their archived media "the most precious thing to me".

"[Memories] have each part of my life within them from joyful events like births, sad moments of loss, times spent with loved ones, [and] my complete adolescence," they wrote.

Expert Analysis

Dr Taylor Annabell, a university scholar at a Dutch institution in the Netherlands, said that the platform's decision demonstrates the ramifications of business-oriented apps being used to store meaningful individual recordings.

"They benefit from this confidence, interdependence, and assumption of perpetual availability, which even encourages some users to continue using the app or continue to use it in order to revisit their stored media," she informed the media. "Yet these are not altruistic protectors of private remembrance."