🔗 Share this article

"Half of my life is archived on the platform, and suddenly they demand us to cover the cost for it."

One-star reviews and a sense of unfairness have flooded online discussion since the messaging service became the latest digital platform to introduce fees for a function that users previously accessed for without payment.

The company behind Snapchat revealed in September that it would require payment from users if they have over five gigabytes of saved photos and recordings stored as the Memories feature.

For many, these old snaps act as a glimpse into earlier times – driving some to blast the corporation of "corporate greed" in posts on social media and poor ratings on mobile app marketplaces.

Available Solutions

The company has equated its paid storage plans to those made available by Apple and Google for mobile devices.

And as an alternative for those who don't want to pay, members may save their archived media – which for certain users span tens of gigabytes – to their device.

Snap stated that only a minority of users would be impacted by the new policy.

They recognized that it was "inherently difficult to transition from receiving a service for free to paying for it" – but suggested it would be "a valuable investment" for subscribers.

A significant number of criticising the decision via digital channels clearly oppose this view.

Public Outcry

A web-based protest labeled the cost a "reminiscence fee", with commenters labeling it "Orwellian" and "absurd" – while a user promised to quit the platform from now on.

In parallel, in a one-star rating on the digital platform, a user identifying as a pseudonymous user said it felt "very unethical".

"Based on my understanding of millennials, most of us have a long history of recorded experiences on this service," they wrote. "And most of us only continued using Snapchat mostly for that reason. Five gigabytes is insufficient when you have extensive collections of moments... Farewell Snapchat."

And, Guste Ven, a university student journalism student in London, shared on a social network her intention to remove the platform.

"I made up my mind that I needed to download all my saved content as quickly as possible," she stated. "Almost all of my teenage years have been captured through my saved snaps, all of the images in there are really important to me."

"The decision appears unreasonable to demand payment people for a feature that has been at no cost for a considerable period."

Unknown Fees

The platform has not disclosed how much storage plans would require in the Britain – only that they are part of a "gradual global rollout".

But a London resident another user, who is based in the capital, commented in a video on the social platform that she would be "devastated" by such charges.

The user mentioned that the platform had become "integrated into daily routine" since she began accessing it in 2014.

Although she acknowledged she recognized the platform needed to earn income, she suggested that the archival function is more valuable than the corporation may have realized.

"In my opinion it's quite an unfair step to demand payment from your users who have been faithful and dedicated," she explained. "These aren't just called Memories, these are our actual memories."

Industry Perspective

Firms choosing to require payment from users for a service that was previously free is a frequent occurrence, and numerous people subscribe to options like iCloud and Google Drive to backup their media content from their handset.

The truth of archiving content in the cloud – which various commentators in the technology sector frequently call as essentially "somebody else's computer" – is that it requires funding.

"Managing trillions of saved content on Snapchat isn't a trivial amount," social media consultant a tech commentator explained. "Snapchat has to attempt to identify a approach to cover the cost of storage, bandwidth, duplicates, file sharing, data protection – everything involved."

However the consultant said that introducing fees for a feature that had previously been free, and subscribers had been invited to access as such, may feel like a "bait and switch" for some.

"Moving the goalposts after individuals have created this extensive stored content doesn't really sit right," he said. For numerous users, he continued, "Archived media exceeds mere information, they're sentimental records."

The opinion was shared by those posting critical reviews, with a user describing their archived media "extremely valuable to me".

"These archives contain all elements of my experiences within them from happy occasions such as new additions, sad moments of loss, experiences shared with close ones, [and] my entire youth," they commented.

Expert Analysis

An academic expert, a university scholar at a Dutch institution in the Netherlands, stated that the platform's decision demonstrates the ramifications of business-oriented apps being used to store meaningful individual recordings.

"They benefit from this reliance, mutual reliance, and expectation of continuous entry, which even incentivises many people to continue using the app or continue to use it in order to revisit their saved content," she explained to the media. "But these are not benevolent guardians of private remembrance."