Ban The Ugly Blue Hyperlink!

Links must be easily identified and their look should be consistent throughout the document, but does a hyperlink have to be default blue and underlined? Please, these days readers expect interactivity everywhere. Opponents of the ugly, eye stabbing, flow destroying blue hyperlink say any element given emphasis to stand out on the page is expected to be linked. Let me example what I'm saying right here: hyperlinks don't have to be blue or underlined. Any element can be given emphasis to attract a reader's attention and today's readers test for interactivity, looking for small clues like the hand cursor to indicate the presence of a hyperlinked element. The upside of this user behaviour for web designers is that links can be within the colour scheme of the website and therefore harmonious to their surrounds and the readers flow inside the document.

Older UX checklists advise to limit hyperlinks so as not to distract the reader, but the value of hyperlinks to Google's understanding of your website is well known by SEO strategists. Many of the top ranking SEO companies have over 1000 links on their websites. In the past the links have contributed to the authority of the website and it's credibility, but Google warns that things have changed and link farming is frowned upon. So, websites risk being demoted by Google in future if the links are found to be pointless. Still, sites with heaps of links are achieving a higher page authority right now until Google starts to implement the new algorithm, so Snap2's link building schedule looks to steadily add quality links to websites. Both inbound and outbound links are of value, the most 'link juice' coming from inbound links from quality sites.