🔗 Share this article

"Half of my experiences is saved on this app, and unexpectedly they demand us to fork out money for it."

Poor feedback and a perception of unfairness have flooded online discussion since Snapchat became the latest technology company to put a price tag on a function that users previously accessed for without payment.

The company behind Snapchat announced in September that it would start charging users if they have exceeding five gigabytes worth of previously shared photos and recordings stored as the Memories feature.

Among numerous users, these old snaps act as a window to the past – prompting some to blast the firm of "corporate greed" in posts on online platforms and poor reviews on digital storefronts.

Available Solutions

Snapchat's parent has likened its paid storage plans to those made available by tech giants for handsets.

And as an alternative for individuals avoiding fees, members can download their saved content – which for many people amount to tens of gigabytes – to their own hardware.

Snap indicated that only a minority of members would be influenced by the updated terms.

It also acknowledged that it was "inherently difficult to move from accessing content at no charge to covering the expense" – but suggested it would be "worth the cost" for subscribers.

Numerous denouncing the decision online appear unconvinced.

Public Outcry

An online petition labeled the fee a "archival levy", with participants calling it "bleak" and "outrageous" – while a user vowed to quit the application in the future.

In parallel, in a one-star review on the Google Play store, a person named an online commenter said it felt "morally questionable".

"Based on my understanding of millennials, most of us have years worth of recorded experiences on the platform," they said. "Numerous users only remained on the platform primarily for that feature. 5GB is absolutely nothing when you have years worth of recordings... Bye Snap."

Furthermore, a journalism student, a university student media studies major in the UK capital, revealed on the video platform her intention to remove the application.

"I made up my mind that I wanted to export all my memories as soon as I could," she stated. "Almost all of my adolescence have been captured through my archived posts, all of the pictures in there are really important to me."

"The decision appears unreasonable to start charging people for something that has been at no cost for a considerable period."

Uncertain Costs

The company has yet to announce how much storage plans would cost in the Britain – only that they are part of a "gradual global rollout".

However 23-year-old a different individual, who is based in the city, stated in a upload on TikTok that she would be "devastated" by these fees.

The user explained that the service had become "a regular habit" since she first joined in several years ago.

While she said she accepted the service needed to generate revenue, Amber indicated that the saved content option means more to users than the firm may have understood.

"I think it's a somewhat inequitable move to demand payment from your subscribers who have been loyal and devoted," she said. "These are not merely labeled 'Memories', these are our actual memories."

Professional Insight

Companies deciding to charge from customers for a service that was earlier without cost is a common practice, and millions cover the cost of options like iCloud and Google Drive to backup their media content from their handset.

The reality of archiving content in the digital storage – which some in the digital field often describe as essentially "an external server" – is that it requires funding.

"Hosting vast amounts of Memories on the service isn't a trivial amount," social media consultant a tech commentator explained. "Snapchat has to try to find a way to cover the cost of data retention, data transfer, copies, content delivery, security measures – the entire process."

However Mr Navarra noted that introducing fees for a function that had previously been free, and members had been invited to access as such, may appear as a "misleading tactic" for some.

"Moving the goalposts after individuals have built this huge digital archive doesn't really sit right," he said. In the view of countless individuals, he continued, "Archived media exceeds mere information, they're sentimental records."

The opinion was echoed by those submitting negative feedback, with an individual describing their Snapchat photos and videos "deeply important to me".

"[Memories] have all elements of my experiences within them from joyful events like births, mourning of passed loved ones, memories with friends/family, [and] my entire youth," they wrote.

Research Perspective

An academic expert, a research fellow at a Dutch institution in the the Low Countries, stated that the platform's decision shows the implications of for-profit services being used to store emotional private media.

"Platforms gain from this trust, interdependence, and expectation of continuous entry, which even encourages certain individuals to remain with the platform or continue to use it in order to revisit their stored media," she told the media. "However these are not altruistic protectors of individual recollection."