🔗 Share this article

"A significant portion of my life is stored on this app, and suddenly they want us to cover the cost for it."

Poor reviews and a perception of inequity have flooded social media conversations since the app emerged as the newest tech firm to introduce fees for a service that users previously utilized for free.

The app's parent company announced in the fall that it would start charging subscribers if they have exceeding five gigabytes of archived pictures and videos stored as the Memories feature.

Among numerous users, these old snaps act as a window to the past – driving some to blast the corporation of "corporate greed" in comments on online platforms and unfavorable feedback on Google and Apple's app stores.

Alternative Options

Snapchat's parent has compared its paid storage plans to those offered by major companies for handsets.

And as an alternative for users unwilling to subscribe, users can download their Memories – which for certain users amount to large volumes – to their personal gadget.

The firm stated that only a minority of subscribers would be influenced by the updated terms.

They recognized that it was "never easy to move from receiving a service for free to covering the expense" – but implied it would be "worth the cost" for subscribers.

Numerous opposing the move on the internet appear unconvinced.

User Backlash

An online petition labeled the charge a "memory tax", with users describing it "bleak" and "absurd" – while a user threatened never to use the app from now on.

At the same time, in a poor evaluation on the Google Play store, a user calling themselves Natacha Jonsson said it felt "very unethical".

"If I know millennials right, many people have years worth of recorded experiences on the platform," they said. "The vast majority only kept the app mostly for that feature. 5GB is absolutely nothing when you have years worth of memories... Goodbye to the app."

Additionally, a journalism student, a university student media studies major in the UK capital, revealed on a social network her decision to remove the platform.

"I decided that I wanted to export all my memories as immediately," she explained. "Almost all of my teenage years have been captured through my Snapchat memories, all of the pictures in there are really important to me."

"This seems illogical to introduce fees individuals for a feature that has been free for such a long time."

Uncertain Costs

Snapchat has not yet said how much storage plans would be priced at in the Britain – only that they are part of a "phased international launch".

However 23-year-old Amber Daley, who resides in London, stated in a video on the social platform that she would be "devastated" by the new costs.

Amber explained that the app had become "a regular habit" since she first joined in the past.

Although she acknowledged she understood the platform needed to generate revenue, the user suggested that the saved content option means more to users than the firm may have anticipated.

"I think it's a rather unjust step to demand payment from your users who have been faithful and dedicated," she commented. "This feature is more than a name, these are our genuine personal moments."

Expert Analysis

Companies opting to impose fees from customers for a service that was earlier without cost is a common practice, and numerous people cover the cost of options like cloud storage solutions to preserve their photos and videos from their smartphone.

The truth of keeping information in the digital storage – which some in the tech industry like to refer to as essentially "a remote system" – is that it costs money.

"Hosting vast amounts of archived media on Snapchat isn't a trivial amount," online expert a tech commentator explained. "The platform has to attempt to identify a method to cover the cost of storage, data transfer, copies, media distribution, data protection – all that stuff."

Yet the expert noted that requiring payment for a feature that had earlier required no payment, and subscribers had been prompted to utilize as such, may appear as a "bait and switch" for some.

"Moving the goalposts after users have built this extensive stored content seems unfair," he noted. For numerous users, he continued, "Archived media exceeds mere information, they're personal mementos."

The opinion was echoed by those submitting negative feedback, with one person labeling their Snapchat photos and videos "deeply important to me".

"These archives contain every aspect of my experiences within them from happy occasions such as new additions, grieving for lost relatives, memories with friends/family, [and] my whole teenage years," they expressed.

Research Perspective

A postdoctoral researcher, a postdoctoral researcher at a Dutch institution in the the Low Countries, explained that the platform's decision demonstrates the consequences of for-profit services being used to store emotional private media.

"The companies profit from this reliance, connected relationship, and assumption of perpetual availability, which even encourages some users to remain with the platform or persist with the feature in order to revisit their archive," she explained to the media. "However these are not benevolent guardians of private remembrance."