🔗 Share this article

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

Poor ratings and a perception of inequity have dominated online discussion since the messaging service became the newest digital platform to put a price tag on a function that individuals previously accessed for without payment.

The company behind Snapchat declared in the fall that it would start charging subscribers if they have exceeding five gigabytes of previously shared images and recordings stored as the Memories feature.

Among numerous users, these old snaps serve as a glimpse into earlier times – prompting some to blast the company of "money-hungry tactics" in comments on digital networks and negative feedback on digital storefronts.

Other Choices

The company has compared its premium storage tiers to those made available by tech giants for handsets.

As another possibility for users unwilling to subscribe, members can download their Memories – which for some cover large volumes – to their device.

Snap mentioned that only a limited group of subscribers would be impacted by the changes.

The company admitted that it was "inherently difficult to move from using a feature without cost to paying for it" – but suggested it would be "worth the cost" for subscribers.

Numerous criticising the move via digital channels clearly oppose this view.

Widespread Discontent

A web-based protest dubbed the cost a "memory tax", with participants calling it "dystopian" and "outrageous" – while a user threatened to abandon the application from now on.

Meanwhile, in a one-star review on the app marketplace, a person calling themselves Natacha Jonsson said it felt "deeply unfair".

"Based on my understanding of millennials, the majority have a long history of personal moments on Snapchat," they wrote. "And most of us only continued using Snapchat mainly for this purpose. Five gigabytes is insufficient when you have extensive collections of moments... Goodbye to the app."

And, a London-based user, a university student aspiring reporter in a major city, posted on a social network her decision to uninstall the platform.

"I decided that I had to save all my saved content as quickly as possible," she mentioned. "The vast majority of my adolescence have been documented through my saved snaps, all of the photos in there are extremely valuable to me."

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

Uncertain Costs

The company has not disclosed how much premium options would cost in the UK – only that they are part of a "gradual global rollout".

Yet 23-year-old a different individual, who also lives in London, commented in a post on the social platform that she would be "upset" by such charges.

Amber noted that the platform had become "a regular habit" since she started using it in 2014.

Although she acknowledged she understood the platform needed to make money, she proposed that the saved content option holds greater significance than the company may have understood.

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

Industry Perspective

Companies choosing to require payment from subscribers for a service that was previously free is nothing new, and countless individuals cover the cost of services like iCloud and Google Drive to backup their photos and videos from their smartphone.

The truth of storing data in the digital storage – which various commentators in the technology sector like to refer to as simply "an external server" – is that it involves expenses.

"Storing enormous quantities of Memories on the service demands considerable investment," social media consultant a tech commentator stated. "The company has to try to find a method to cover the cost of storage, bandwidth, duplicates, file sharing, data protection – everything involved."

However the consultant indicated that imposing charges for a function that had earlier required no payment, and subscribers had been prompted to utilize as such, may appear as a "deceptive practice" for some.

"Moving the goalposts after users have built this huge digital archive feels inappropriate," he noted. For numerous users, he stated, "Saved content is more than stored files, they're sentimental records."

The feeling was reflected by those leaving negative feedback, with a user calling their Snapchat photos and videos "deeply important to me".

"These archives contain every aspect of my personal journey within them from joyful events like births, grieving for lost relatives, memories with friends/family, [and] my complete adolescence," they expressed.

Academic Insight

An academic expert, a university scholar at a Dutch institution in the Netherlands, explained that the company's action demonstrates the consequences of business-oriented apps being used to archive emotional private media.

"Platforms gain from this confidence, mutual reliance, and assumption of perpetual availability, which even incentivises certain individuals to continue using the app or continue to use it in order to review their archive," she informed the BBC. "However these are not altruistic protectors of personal memory."