🔗 Share this article

"Half of my personal history is saved on the platform, and unexpectedly they expect us to fork out money for it."

Poor ratings and a sense of inequity have dominated online discussion since Snapchat became the most recent technology company to introduce fees for a feature that people previously enjoyed using for at no cost.

The app's parent company declared in last month that it would begin imposing fees people if they have exceeding five GB of archived photos and recordings stored as the Memories feature.

Among numerous users, these past uploads serve as a glimpse into earlier times – prompting some to criticize the firm of "money-hungry tactics" in comments on online platforms and poor feedback on digital storefronts.

Available Solutions

Snapchat's parent has likened its premium storage tiers to those provided by tech giants for handsets.

As another possibility for individuals avoiding fees, users may save their Memories – which for some amount to large volumes – to their personal gadget.

The firm stated that only a small number of users would be impacted by the new policy.

They recognized that it was "always challenging to transition from using a feature without cost to covering the expense" – but proposed it would be "a valuable investment" for members.

A significant number of opposing the move on the internet seem to disagree.

Public Outcry

An online petition called the cost a "memory tax", with participants describing it "dystopian" and "ridiculous" – while one person threatened never to use the app again.

At the same time, in a negative review on the Google Play store, a individual named a pseudonymous user said it felt "very unethical".

"As a member of that generation, most of us have a long history of memories on Snapchat," they said. "And most of us only kept the app mostly for that feature. 5GB is absolutely nothing when you have a long timeline of memories... Bye Snap."

Furthermore, a journalism student, a university student aspiring reporter in London, revealed on the video platform her plans to uninstall the application.

"I made up my mind that I had to save all my memories as immediately," she explained. "Almost all of my adolescence have been recorded through my Snapchat memories, all of the pictures in there are extremely valuable to me."

"The decision appears unreasonable to demand payment users for a service that has been free for such a long time."

Unknown Fees

Snapchat has yet to announce how much premium options would be priced at in the UK – only that they are part of a "slow worldwide introduction".

However a London resident Amber Daley, who is based in London, commented in a post on the social platform that she would be "devastated" by such charges.

Amber explained that the service had become "a part of everyday life" since she first joined in the past.

Although she acknowledged she understood the service needed to make money, the user indicated that the saved content option means more to users than the firm may have realized.

"In my opinion it's a rather unjust move to demand payment from your subscribers who have been faithful and dedicated," she commented. "This feature is more than a name, these are our genuine personal moments."

Professional Insight

Firms choosing to require payment from users for a function that was once complimentary is a frequent occurrence, and millions subscribe to services like cloud storage solutions to preserve their media content from their handset.

The truth of archiving content in the cloud – which various commentators in the technology sector frequently call as essentially "an external server" – is that it costs money.

"Managing trillions of saved content on the service isn't a trivial amount," digital strategist an industry analyst explained. "The company has to seek out a way to fund the operation of storage, network usage, back-ups, media distribution, data protection – the entire process."

However the consultant said that requiring payment for a feature that had previously been free, and subscribers had been prompted to utilize as such, may seem like a "deceptive practice" for certain individuals.

"Altering the terms after individuals have built this extensive stored content seems unfair," he noted. For numerous users, he continued, "Saved content is more than stored files, they're personal mementos."

The sentiment was echoed by those posting negative feedback, with one person labeling their saved images and clips "extremely valuable to me".

"These archives contain each part of my experiences within them from happy occasions such as new additions, sad moments of loss, times spent with loved ones, [and] my whole teenage years," they wrote.

Expert Analysis

An academic expert, a university scholar at Utrecht University in the the Low Countries, said that Snapchat's move shows the consequences of for-profit services being used to save sentimental personal content.

"The companies profit from this reliance, connected relationship, and presumption of never-ending access, which even incentivises certain individuals to continue using the app or keep accessing it in order to revisit their stored media," she told the BBC. "Yet these are not benevolent guardians of individual recollection."