Ever since its inception, the world’s most popular messaging app has retained the status of an ad-free, then almost ad-free experience, but that “free” ride is officially reaching a fork in the road. WhatsApp is reportedly preparing to launch a paid membership tier this year starting with users in Europe to allow them to bypass the advertisements currently rolling out across the platform.
As Meta looks to monetize the “Updates” tab, this new ad-free subscription marks the first time in history that users may have to pay to keep their messaging experience clean.
This move is not happening in a vacuum. WhatsApp, owned by Meta, is following the exact strategy that Meta deployed for Facebook and Instagram across Europe. Under the model, users are asked to make the following choice: either allow Meta to track their activity for personalized advertisement or pay a monthly fee to keep the feed clean.
While Meta is copying the base strategy directly from Facebook and Instagram, WhatsApp’s personal chats remain ad-free, at least for now. This means that users pay Meta to keep the Status and Channels sections ad-free and stop creating an advertising profile of users who pay the premium.
What happens if you don’t pay?
Personal chats remain free of advertisement, at least for now. This is something that Meta has shied away from as it would like drive users towards competitors like Signal or Telegram.
Users who do not subscribe will continue to see sponsored content in the “Updates” tab.
The Verdict: Is WhatsApp Premium Worth It?
| Pros | Cons |
| Clean Interface: Removes intrusive banners and sponsored posts from the Status and Channels tabs. | New Monthly Expense: Adds to “subscription fatigue” for an app that has been free for over a decade. |
| Data Privacy: Meta may not create a profile for advertising, since there are not any ads to show. | Partial Solution: Early reports suggest ads remain in “Channels” you don’t follow, so it may not be 100% ad-free. |
| Early Access: Potential for premium-only features, such as larger file sharing or advanced chat organization. | Limited: Meta may limit the ability to pay to avoid ads to certain countries, similarly to how it handles this on Facebook and Instagram. |
As the line between personal messaging and social media continues to blur, WhatsApp’s transition into a “freemium” service feels like the end of an era. For now, the core of WhatsApp, private conversations between users, remains untouched and ad-free.
However, now that the infrastructure is in place, Meta might consider pushing ads more aggressively on WhatsApp.
Just to point out, WhatsApp started with a 1 dollar per year experience. I was more than happy to pay that at the time.
I still would for a no ad no tracking experience.
Don’t really know much about messaging apps, but the three mentioned–What’s App, Signal, and Telegram–all sound like privacy nightmares. Signal is recommended by most, but Signal wants the phone number; rather defeats the purpose of encryption. Tell the whole world 867-5309/Jenny is online.
Session is recommended by privacy experts:
https://getsession.org/
AI recommends others: Briar, Element, Ricochet.
The article? What’s the reason? Who is uses WhatsApp other than those who care less about their privacy?
WhatsApp is owned by one of the biggest scumbags in the industry so any more negative press for this app is only a good thing.
I believe someone is also challenging Meta in court suggesting that there is no encryption if I am remembering correctly.
What is extraordinary is that these companies carry on as if they are the only game in town when there is an abundance of alternatives and perhaps even too many which is why we have such a fragmented uptake which is something we cannot really have in such an application as we want to have our friends and family adopt something that is better but opinions do differ but what is true is that there are tons of options that are better than WhatsApp.
I am always on the lookout for better applications.
Keet seems to be an interesting project as does Jami.
I did look at SimpleX but I am not on board with that one 100%. The PC application is odd feeling from installation to usage. Navigating to share a file prompts you with an antiquated file manager that does not work well with Listary from memory.
I am not too keen on matrix based applications myself as they still require some sort of server in the middle and often enough they have some sort of file size sharing limitation and I am not entirely sure where those files end up being hosted from, who owns said server, or what happens to the shared file after. I do not like that many of these apps will compress images or videos upon sending a file either.
Has anyone else here used Keet at all?