In a recent ASAE Communications Section newsletter, Leslie O’Flahavan and Marilynne Rudick tell us that to "rev up our Web writing" we need to get rid of click here altogether. They write:
“Click here” is lame link language. Back in the day, some people argued that novice users wouldn’t know what to do unless a link said “click here.” Well, that’s ancient history—the Web equivalent of telling airline passengers how to fasten their seat belts. “Click here” is lame because it doesn’t help users find information as they scan, and it doesn’t tell the users where the link is leading them--and what they’ll find when they get there.
Instead of relying on “Click here,” you should instead embed your link into the text that tells users what they’re linking to. So forget “Click here to subscribe to the newsletter.” Instead, your link should be: “Subscribe to the newsletter.”
Am I the only one who disagrees? I don't disagree specifically with the newsletter example they give, but with the concept in general. And I think part of the problem is that there are so many hyperlinks in text these days that, as readers, we often end up on a hunt to find the one "real" link that we need to read the report or register for the conference - or subscribe to the newsletter.
It reminds me of a rant I read a while back about blog entries where every word has a link. Overkill.
Feedback please. Who else thinks "click here" is lame? And who is going to stay old school (and revved down, I guess) with me and stick to "click here"? ;) (I didn't entirely agree with their assessment of PDFs either, but it didn't rile me up as much as the click here.)