🔗 Share this article

"A significant portion of my personal history is stored on the platform, and now they expect us to fork out money for it."

One-star ratings and a feeling of inequity have taken over digital forums since Snapchat became the latest tech firm to introduce fees for a feature that people previously utilized for free.

The company behind Snapchat revealed in September that it would start charging people if they have exceeding five gigabytes of previously shared pictures and recordings stored as Snapchat Memories.

In the eyes of countless individuals, these retro posts act as a portal to bygone days – prompting some to accuse the corporation of "money-hungry tactics" in comments on digital networks and negative reviews on mobile app marketplaces.

Alternative Options

The company has likened its premium storage tiers to those offered by tech giants for mobile devices.

And as an alternative for users unwilling to subscribe, subscribers may save their Memories – which for some cover tens of gigabytes – to their personal gadget.

The firm indicated that only a minority of members would be affected by the new policy.

It also acknowledged that it was "inherently difficult to transition from using a feature without cost to covering the expense" – but proposed it would be "justified by the benefits" for subscribers.

Many opposing the move via digital channels appear unconvinced.

Public Outcry

A digital campaign labeled the charge a "archival levy", with participants describing it "Orwellian" and "absurd" – while a user threatened to abandon the app again.

Meanwhile, in a negative review on the Google Play store, a user calling themselves Natacha Jonsson said it felt "very unethical".

"If I know millennials right, many people have a long history of memories on Snapchat," they said. "The vast majority only kept the app primarily for this purpose. 5GB is absolutely nothing when you have extensive collections of recordings... Bye Snap."

Additionally, a London-based user, a university student aspiring reporter in the UK capital, revealed on the video platform her plans to delete the platform.

"I concluded that I had to save all my memories as immediately," she explained. "Nearly every part of my adolescence have been documented through my archived posts, all of the photos in there are really important to me."

"The decision appears unreasonable to start charging users for a feature that has been complimentary for a considerable period."

Unspecified Pricing

The company has not yet said how much subscription tiers would be priced at in the Britain – only that they are part of a "slow worldwide introduction".

But a London resident Amber Daley, who also lives in London, said in a upload on the social platform that she would be "upset" by the new costs.

Amber mentioned that the app had become "a regular habit" since she first joined in several years ago.

Although she acknowledged she recognized the platform needed to generate revenue, Amber suggested that the archival function holds greater significance than the firm may have realized.

"Personally, I believe it's a somewhat inequitable decision to charge your users who have been consistent and engaged," she said. "This feature is more than a name, these are our genuine personal moments."

Industry Perspective

Businesses choosing to require payment from customers for a function that was previously free is a frequent occurrence, and countless individuals cover the cost of services like iCloud and Google Drive to backup their media content from their smartphone.

The reality of keeping information in the online servers – which some in the digital field frequently call as simply "an external server" – is that it requires funding.

"Managing trillions of saved content on Snapchat isn't a trivial amount," social media consultant an industry analyst commented. "The platform has to attempt to identify a way to offset the expenses of storage, bandwidth, back-ups, file sharing, encryption – the entire process."

However the expert indicated that introducing fees for a function that had once been complimentary, and members had been invited to access as such, may seem like a "deceptive practice" for many people.

"Altering the terms after individuals have built this extensive stored content doesn't really sit right," he noted. In the view of countless individuals, he stated, "Archived media exceeds mere information, they're personal mementos."

The opinion was shared by those submitting negative feedback, with one person describing their Snapchat photos and videos "extremely valuable to me".

"The stored media includes every aspect of my experiences within them from celebrations of new family members' births, grieving for lost relatives, experiences shared with close ones, [and] my complete adolescence," they wrote.

Expert Analysis

A postdoctoral researcher, a university scholar at Utrecht University in the the Low Countries, said that the company's action shows the consequences of commercial platforms being used to archive meaningful individual recordings.

"They benefit from this confidence, mutual reliance, and presumption of never-ending access, which even encourages many people to remain with the platform or continue to use it in order to review their stored media," she told the BBC. "Yet these are not charitable custodians of personal memory."