The website looks like it is from 1990. But the numbers are high-quality and well-founded MarketingSherpa once ran an experiment where they tested the text of a hyperlink in an email newsletter. Originally the text was "Continue here" to read the rest of the article. First they dug through various newsletters and looked for a tried and tested text. Then they tested the different texts against each other. The result of the click rates then looked like this: "Click to continue" - 8.53% “Continue to article” – 3.3% “Read more You see.
Click here” is by far way ahead. I understand now when you yell and say, "But that was in an email!" In this case, email and web are the same. Text is text. No matter where Israel phone number list he is. And if you bought the email story from me, maybe you're still not so sure? You think this all sounds pretty outdated? "Click here" is not 1990 "Click here" is not obsolete. "Click here" is effective. OK. This might have been more common back in the day when the web was in its infancy and all of us were greenhorns. But even today, “click here” has not lost its meaning. I also know that any "web usability" expert would wring my neck.
Even Jakob Nielsen, of whom I'm actually a big fan, mentions it here in second place: Don't use "click here" or other non-descriptive link text. But why is it still useful? Because the monkey blog is about advertising copy when blogging. And not about usability. We want action on the part of the reader. And sometimes you can overlook usability aspects. now, he only scans your article. He immediately notices "Click here". A hyperlink that works as a call-to-action. A good example would be: Want to learn more about headlines? click here . The hyperlink serves as a kind of call-to-action button.