iEntry 10th Anniversary RSS Newsletter Advertising
Join the WebProWorld Forum!
Text: Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size | Print Print Article | Share: Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Post to Twitter Post to Facebook
6 commentsThursday, October 30, 2008

Showing Respect With Your Anchor Text

Don't Accidentally "Diss" Your References

Bloggers and other web-based writers do a lot of linking. It's great for the Blogosphere. In fact it's really the only reason we have a Blogosphere. How often are our links misleading though? I'm not talking about "paid" or sponsored links that are deceptive and just trying to go after a click. That's another issue entirely. I'm talking about just the everyday point-of-reference links.

I started thinking about this as I came across a post on the NY Times Bits blog talking about online video and attention spans. The post talks about Hulu having its first birthday and mentions something about how the site was initially ridiculed. They link the word "ridicule" to an older post from their own blog.

Now when I mouse-over that link, I see that it goes to one of their own posts, and I wonder if they were the ones ridiculing it. Not that it particularly makes a difference to me one way or the other, but I was curious, so I followed the link, and it actually goes to a post that just mentions that people have been calling Hulu (which was not yet named at that point) things like "Clown Co." (who's laughing now? But again, that's another issue).

What I'm getting at is that when Bits links the word "Ridicule" to one of their own posts, it kind of lends to the connotation that they were the ones ridiculing Hulu, which given Hulu's success, would make such a thing a little embarrassing.

I’m not trying to insult Bits. They just happened to have an example that caught my eye. In fact, it got me thinking about one of my own articles that I wrote a few weeks ago that mentioned people criticizing blogs as news sources. I linked to a post from a blogger who had written about another writer who was doing such criticizing, but the words I chose to link seemed to indicate that the blogger I was linking to was actually the one doing the criticizing. That blogger called me on it, thinking that I was actually was trying to indicate such, and seeing his point, I changed the wording of the link.

This is not something we often think about, but things like this could actually shed negative light (even if in a very minute amount) on those we are linking to, who deserve to be credited for providing the information we're linking to. I think the "mouse-over" is taken for granted. People will see the URL for a link and sometimes decide whether or not they want to follow it based on that. Think about who you're linking to, and show them the respect they deserve with your choice of anchor text. Even (and especially perhaps) if you are linking to yourself.

About the author:
Chris Crum has been a part of the WebProNews team and the iEntry Network of B2B Publications since 2003. Twitter: @CCrum237

Excellent Point

Now that you mention it, I've done the same thing. Now that you've made me conscious of this, I'll think a little more about it. Thanks.

RE: Excellent Point

No problem. I'm sure it's something we have all done without giving it much thought.

Publish A Comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
7 + 8 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
SEARCH
Popular WPN Business Resources












Subscribe to WebProNews


Send me relevant info