🔗 Share this article

"Half of my personal history is archived on this app, and now they want us to cover the cost for it."

Negative reviews and a feeling of inequity have flooded online discussion since the messaging service emerged as the newest tech firm to introduce fees for a function that individuals previously utilized for without payment.

The app's parent company revealed in September that it would require payment from people if they have exceeding five GB of archived photos and videos stored as Memories.

For many, these past uploads function as a window to the past – prompting some to blast the firm of "profit-driven motives" in messages on online platforms and unfavorable ratings on digital storefronts.

Alternative Options

The company has likened its subscription options to those made available by Apple and Google for smartphones.

And as an alternative for users unwilling to subscribe, users have the ability to export their Memories – which for certain users amount to significant data – to their device.

Snap indicated that only a minority of users would be affected by the changes.

The company admitted that it was "inherently difficult to move from receiving a service for free to covering the expense" – but suggested it would be "worth the cost" for members.

Numerous opposing the change on the internet seem to disagree.

Public Outcry

A digital campaign labeled the fee a "memory tax", with users calling it "dystopian" and "ridiculous" – while one person promised to abandon the app in the future.

In parallel, in a one-star rating on the Google Play store, a person identifying as Natacha Jonsson said it felt "deeply unfair".

"As a member of that generation, the majority have a long history of memories on Snapchat," they wrote. "Numerous users only kept the app mostly for this purpose. Five gigabytes is insufficient when you have extensive collections of recordings... Bye Snap."

And, Guste Ven, a university student journalism student in London, shared on TikTok her intention to uninstall the application.

"I made up my mind that I needed to download all my memories as quickly as possible," she explained. "Almost all of my teenage years have been captured through my Snapchat memories, all of the photos in there are extremely valuable to me."

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

Unknown Fees

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

But a London resident a different individual, who resides in the capital, said in a upload on the video service that she would be "distraught" by these fees.

Amber noted that the app had become "a part of everyday life" since she started using it in 2014.

Despite admitting she accepted the platform needed to generate revenue, Amber indicated that the archival function holds greater significance than the company may have understood.

"I think it's quite an unfair move to impose fees on your users who have been loyal and devoted," she commented. "These are not merely labeled 'Memories', these are our actual memories."

Industry Perspective

Companies choosing to require payment from subscribers for a feature that was earlier without cost is a common practice, and millions subscribe to services like cloud storage solutions to preserve their photos and videos from their smartphone.

The truth of keeping information in the digital storage – which some in the technology sector frequently call as simply "an external server" – is that it involves expenses.

"Storing trillions of Memories on the service isn't a trivial amount," social media consultant a tech commentator stated. "The company has to attempt to identify a way to offset the expenses of archiving, data transfer, duplicates, content delivery, data protection – everything involved."

But the consultant said that introducing fees for a service that had previously been free, and members had been prompted to utilize as such, may appear as a "bait and switch" for some.

"Moving the goalposts after people have created this massive online collection seems unfair," he said. For numerous users, he added, "Memories aren't just data dumps, they're sentimental records."

The opinion was reflected by those submitting unfavorable comments, with one person labeling their archived media "extremely valuable to me".

"These archives contain all elements of my experiences within them from celebrations of new family members' births, mourning of passed loved ones, memories with friends/family, [and] my complete adolescence," they wrote.

Research Perspective

A postdoctoral researcher, a university scholar at Utrecht University in the Holland, stated that the company's action shows the implications of commercial platforms being used to store sentimental personal content.

"The companies profit from this trust, interdependence, and presumption of never-ending access, which even motivates certain individuals to stay on the service or keep accessing it in order to review their stored media," she told journalists. "However these are not altruistic protectors of private remembrance."