"Click Here" - Good anchor text or not?

All things considered, from SE benefits to usability

[MatthewHSE]

There's been a lot of talk here about how "click here" isn't good anchor text. I understand that in many cases it breaks up the even flow of your copy, doesn't make sense if the page is printed, etc. I also understand that relevant anchor text is good for SEO.

But what about usability?

Every link on my website (I think) has some sort of "effect" applied to it with CSS. It's bold text when everything else around it is normal, it underlines on hover, sometimes even a background color depending on the context. Besides the fact that your normal "hand" mouse cursor shows up over them, and they're just plain relevant. (Example, "In addition to our other services, we also publish a magazine that contains . . . ")

I've been using "relevant anchor text" a lot lately, and so far I've had several average Internet users say that they didn't know what to click to get where they needed to go. Not just for my site, either, but for other jobs I've done as well. In other words, it doesn't seem restricted to a single audience.

It almost seems as though most visitors, except in obvious navigational areas, need to be told "click here" to know that they can click there. It astounded me the first time I came across this; I mean, there was absolutely no reason for that text to be bold other than the fact that it was a link. Plus it was just the kind of relevant text that SHOULD lead somewhere else. And yet the link was being overlooked just because it didn't say to "Click here for blah." (Worst part was, the person who told me about this was one of my clients, who seemed to think I should have known better than to say anything BUT "click here.")

So what does anyone else think of this? I like the idea of using relevant anchor text, but what about usability for the visitors? Most of us here would recognize a well-done link when we saw it, but then most race-car drivers could probably safely go 200 MPH on the Interstate. Doesn't mean the speed limit will be raised, though, just because a small group could handle it! ;)

Looking forward to some other insights on this issue!

Matthew

[AWildman]

"Click here" isn't exactly user friendly to people with screen readers. It isn't descriptive enough. I avoid click here like the plague. I may say "Use the links below to find out more about ...." and then have a few links by themselves with relevant text so that the link is descriptive of the information to which they will be taken.
For me it isn't even about SEO. I simply believe that plain ol' links (blue text, underlined) are sufficient for the majority of users. I suppose a test you could run is to have the same links in both the text of the page within a sentence NOT using Click Here and then within the main navigation. If no one EVER uses the link that is mixed in with the body of the text, or uses it rarely, then the next step is to see whether using Click Here changes that.
I would pass a param on each different link so that I knew whether they got to the page from the main navigation link or the body text link. That param should appear in your log files and you can easily discern the number that used each.

[PCInk]

Agree. Plain blue underlined links are perfect. There is another rule: Never underline anything other than a link so the user instinctively knows what is a link.

"Click Here" is appalling link text for usability:

On Windows XP, open your website, press 'Start'+U (at the same time) and then close your eyes. Using tab and return, navigate your site. Ctrl+Shift+Spacebar to read the whole page. This can be an eye-opener. Literally. If you need to open your eyes to navigate your site, there is something wrong with it.

[grahamstewart]

Another good test - press F4 in Opera and choose the 'Links' option. This will list all your link text in a sidebar.

In theory you should be able to understand the link text on its own and use it to navigate the site. (Many screen readers and other accessibility tools have an option to list links like this).

[john_k]

Every link on my website (I think) has some sort of "effect" applied to it with CSS. It's bold text when everything else around it is normal, it underlines on hover, sometimes even a background color depending on the context.

I agree that blue, underlined text is the most obvious. The reason for it is that it is the defacto standard. If you don't use this standard, you need to at least be consistant across your own site. I also agree that the ONLY time text should be underlined is when it is a link.

Also, underlining with hover may be okay, but if there is no good clue that there is a link lurking under the text to begin with, the user will never hover.

[limbo]

'Start'+U ....quite an eye opener

I am wearing a pair of headphones now. This makes a very interesting test of a website.

Mine stood up quite well. But sites without 'skip navigation' are a nightmare! Low graphics are excellent as you would expect and tabular designs are hopeless! Text is read top to bottom regardless of the table cells - meaning sentences run into one-another making paralell paragraphs gobbledegook.

Anchor tagged images do not 'read' automatically you have to ctrl+shift+enter to read alt text.

Also pages that use punctuation quirks as visual guides are adding a great deal of excess narrative.

Like:

>> link ¦ link ¦ Link ¦ link << or
>> [link] [link] [link] [link] <<

each charcter is read out like:-

"is greater than,is greater than, link, straight bracket, link, straight bracket, link...... is greater than,is greater than, left square bracket, link, right square bracket , left square bracket....." etc etc..

Painful!

The 'top of page' link is handy, and so is 'title' text.

Placing dates with full stops between the numbers (17.03.04)identifies them as numerical, dates written using backslashes (17/03/04) are read as dates not numbers. This has reminded me to download Jaws!

I wonder if spiders munch pages the same way?

[Reflection]

"Click Here" is appalling link text for usability:

Yes but what is "usability"? The term now seems to exclusively refer to visually impaired users.

Lets face it, in terms of the general web surfing public, Click Here is the most helpful thing you can do for 'computer challenged' people. It tells them exactly where to click/what to do.

Personnly I avoid "click here" like the plague, but I cant deny the fact that "click here" is helpful for the general web surfer.

[PCInk]

...which is the whole problem.

"Click here" is a nightmare problem for a blind user.

E.G.) For our widgets [a]Click Here[/a]

When it should be (for a users point of view)

[a]For our widgets Click Here[/a]

So that all users get the whole message. The second example is not brilliant, but a lot better than the first.

In the UK, new laws have come into force about disability discrimination and the charity overseeing this has a list of over 1000 websites that they are preparing to take to court. "Click Here" would be against their legislation and could theoretically land you in some trouble.