🔗 Share this article

"A significant portion of my personal history is stored on Snapchat, and now they want us to pay for it."

One-star reviews and a sense of injustice have flooded social media conversations since Snapchat emerged as the most recent tech firm to introduce fees for a function that people previously accessed for free.

The company behind Snapchat declared in September that it would begin imposing fees people if they have over five gigabytes worth of saved images and clips stored as Snapchat Memories.

For many, these past uploads act as a glimpse into earlier times – prompting some to blast the corporation of "profit-driven motives" in posts on social media and unfavorable ratings on mobile app marketplaces.

Alternative Options

Snapchat's parent has equated its paid storage plans to those made available by major companies for smartphones.

And as an alternative for individuals avoiding fees, subscribers have the ability to export their archived media – which for certain users span large volumes – to their personal gadget.

Snap indicated that only a small number of members would be affected by the new policy.

The company admitted that it was "inherently difficult to move from receiving a service for free to paying for it" – but proposed it would be "a valuable investment" for members.

Many criticising the change on the internet seem to disagree.

Widespread Discontent

A web-based protest dubbed the cost a "reminiscence fee", with participants describing it "Orwellian" and "outrageous" – while an individual vowed to quit the application from now on.

Meanwhile, in a negative evaluation on the Google Play store, a user calling themselves Natacha Jonsson said it felt "deeply unfair".

"If I know millennials right, the majority have a long history of recorded experiences on this service," they said. "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."

Additionally, a London-based user, a young adult aspiring reporter in London, posted on the video platform her intention to remove the application.

"I made up my mind that I needed to download all my archived media as immediately," she explained. "Almost all 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 demand payment people for a service that has been complimentary for so many years."

Unspecified Pricing

The company has yet to announce how much subscription tiers would be priced at in the UK – only that they are part of a "slow worldwide introduction".

Yet a London resident a different individual, who resides in the capital, said in a upload on the social platform that she would be "devastated" by such charges.

She mentioned that the platform had become "a part of everyday life" since she started using it in several years ago.

Despite admitting she understood the platform needed to generate revenue, Amber suggested that the saved content option holds greater significance than the firm may have understood.

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

Industry Perspective

Firms opting to impose fees from users for a service that was previously free is nothing new, and millions subscribe to platforms like digital backup services to preserve their photos and videos from their handset.

The reality of keeping information in the digital storage – which various commentators in the tech industry often describe as essentially "an external server" – is that it involves expenses.

"Managing trillions of saved content on the platform requires significant resources," digital strategist a tech commentator explained. "The platform has to try to find a method to offset the expenses of storage, data transfer, duplicates, content delivery, encryption – the entire process."

However the expert said that requiring payment for a service that had previously been free, and members had been prompted to utilize as such, may seem like a "deceptive practice" for many people.

"Moving the goalposts after people have built this huge digital archive seems unfair," he said. And for many, he continued, "Archived media exceeds mere information, they're sentimental records."

The feeling was shared by those leaving unfavorable comments, with an individual calling their saved images and clips "the most precious thing to me".

"The stored media includes each part of my personal journey within them from celebrations of new family members' births, mourning of passed loved ones, memories with friends/family, [and] my whole teenage years," they expressed.

Academic Insight

Dr Taylor Annabell, a research fellow at an educational establishment in the the Low Countries, stated that the platform's decision 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 certain individuals to stay on the service or continue to use it in order to review their saved content," she informed the BBC. "Yet these are not charitable custodians of personal memory."