Should I cloak my external site links?

I recently noticed that a few of the sites I visit seem to be cloaking or hiding their links when they point out to another site. I’ve heard of this cloaking to hide affiliate links, but am wondering whether it’s a good idea and why you, for example, don’t mask your own links?

A very interesting question! Let’s first define link cloaking… a standard link on a Web page looks like this:

<a href=url>clickable text</a>

With a link like this, you can simply move the mouse over the clickable text and the lower left corner of your browser should tell you where you’re going to go if you click (try it here: put your cursor over these words). Sometimes, however, these links can be crazy-long which can make them ugly and difficult to work with, and othertimes you just want to mask the destination so you might use something like

http://www.yoursite.com/shortcuts/33

where you then have a lookup table that says 33=URL. Someone clicks on your masked or cloaked link and they get whisked away to the destination, but they’ll never find out what the destination actually is without clicking.
Is this good? Well, rather than just give you my perspective, I asked a few of my friends and colleagues why they do (or don’t) cloak links on their sites. First off, though, I believe that cloaking is a disservice to your readers because when they hover their mouse over a link, they can’t see where they’re going to go once it’s clicked. Further, from a search engine perspective, cloaking links also means you can’t help other sites gain visibility, so that’s also a consideration.
But other people clearly have other views. Leo Notenboom, who runs Ask Leo, shares this perspective:


I do sometimes have mixed feelings, for both the issue you raise, and the uncertainly of any outgoing link-love I may, or may not, be generating by cloaking links. Typically if I put a link that I specifically want to make sure gets 100% link love, I don’t use my redirector.
I use it for two reasons:

  1. click tracking – the backend of my sql version lets me report on clicks.
  2. ease of change. Best exemplified by the following story: there was an almost canonical list of Windows XP Services with descriptions and recommendations put together by a guy known only as “Black Viper”. It was great, and I linked to that page from several places.

    Then two years ago his site disappeared. Without warning.

    So, I changed my redirector to point to the archive.org copy of his page, and then later to a MajorGeeks.com copy. With one small change all those redirected links on my site were now pointing to the same information elsewhere.

    Then last month he, and his site, came back. Moments ago I restored the pointer in my database, and all those links go back to him.

I expected that as sites disappeared from the internet I might end up changing pointers to go to my own “explanation page”, but I’ve not done that yet. Being able to hit archive.org was pretty cool in this last example, because it was, and is, such a popular collection of information.


Another voice: Greg Bulmash, who runs the slick Fundraw and Brainhandles sites, has his own list of reasons why he likes link cloaking systems:


  1. Click Tracking
  2. Short URLs with your domain name on them. Useful for e-mail newsletters.
  3. Trying to prevent affiliate link hijacking.

I don’t use them, myself. But those are the reasons I understand people use them. Also, remember the 500words fad? Some of the people doing the whole 500 word thing used jump links, so the link from your purchased word travelled through a cloak to get to your site. In that case, the general consensus was that it diminished the value of buying words there because you didn’t get any SEO value from the link, just the clicks.
And there is the element of hiding the destination from the users, but I think that’s a minor point.
There may be a percentage of your users who care whether they’re getting an accurate URL in advance of clicking to it, but when a portion of your traffic comes from people who type your URL into Google to get to your site, I think you may be overestimating the size of that percentage.


Popular writer Cathie Stucker who runs the site IdeaLady.com uses some link cloaking herself because, well, I’ll let her explain:


I tend to cloak some of my affiliate links. One reason is so people do not just chop off my affiliate ID. But there are two other reasons:

  1. I use links that are simple so they can easily be given out verbally. If someone calls me on the phone or asks me a question in a seminar, I can easily give out the affiliate link. (“Where should I go to set up a web site?” “http://www.MyFavoriteWebHost.com/”) That also works for something that will be in print, such as in a book or column.
  2. If my recommendation changes (i.e., the merchant goes away or their service deterioriates) all I have to do is change the forwarding. Even if the recommendation was put in print three years ago, it can always be good.

I do not use a unique domain name for each affiliate program. Sometimes I just redirect through a page on my site. But I like giving some of them their own domain names…


Clearly, like anything else, there are pros and cons, but Leo, Greg and Cathie have interesting thoughts on the subject!
What about you, dear reader? Cloak links or leave ’em all transparent?

9 thoughts on “Should I cloak my external site links?”

  1. I want a link cloaker for an affiliate website. However, I cannot access their website to put in any coding. How can I cloak an affiliate website where I cannot access the server but keep people from “chopping” my affiliate link off?

    Reply
  2. great post, I use cloaked links but still make sure that the user can read where they will end up, i.e the cloaked url would still be ‘www.domain.com/read-more-about-the-new-product’

    Reply
  3. Thanks for your query, Claude. Digging around, Webmaster world has an interesting discussion on this topic, wherein they say:
    “Google doesn’t like affiliate links. If you have too many of them on your site, e.g. if you review Amazon products *only* and you add affiliate links to every post, you risk getting a *serious* Google penalty.”
    Again, if you’re doing a natural, organic article on your site and you list a few products that are affiliate links, you’re fine. If you have a directory with dozens or hundreds of affiliate links? You’ve got a problem.
    Reference URL:
    http://webmasterweblog.com/google-penalties-what-you-should-avoid.html

    Reply
  4. I have found your site very informatiuon about cloaker links, though recently I have heard that Google does not like affliate links on a page and will penalise you if you had any. I heard its important in such cases to cloack your affiliate marketing links or else you will lose sales. I hope this is right. Can you let me know

    Reply
  5. I want a link cloaker for an affiliate website. However, I cannot access their website to put any coding. How can I cloak an affiliate website where I cannot access the server but keep people from “chopping” my affiliate link off?

    Reply
  6. How can one tell if their affiliate links have been hijacked and how can this be prevented if one does not know how to cloak their links?

    Reply
  7. Hmm, interesting read. I’ve used this method to hide my clickbank affiliate links in a few of my sites, but never taken it a step further. This is definately something for me to look into. Thanks

    Reply
  8. The best link cloaker I have found is Jay Jennings’ Cloak And Tracker. It runs on both Mac and PC platforms, which is a rarity, and allows you to change links on the fly as you mentioned above. You could have an ebook with your affiliate links in it that goes viral, and then the site your promoting goes belly up — all you do is change the link via Cloak and Tracker and you’re saving that traffic. And the tracking is an added bonus to boot.
    The price was recently lowered to $27 (from $49) so it’s a great deal: http://www.cloak-and-tracker.com

    Reply
  9. Dave said: “Sometimes, however, these links can be crazy-long which can make them ugly and difficult to work with.”
    That’s very true, but it’s worth mentioning that almost all web browsers can work with links up to 2048 characters long. And since most users see the anchor text (the “cick here”, not the “http://www…”) it’s not as big an issue on web pages. It is, however, much more important in text e-mails.
    One primary reason is that a lot of mailers break long lines, so though the whole URL is shown, only the first line of it is clickable, meaning any URL longer than 60-80 characters (depending on the mailer) gets broken. In that case, a link cloaker that can shorten the URL is *essential* to ensuring the link even works.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Receive My Weekly Email Newsletter:

Your email address:*
First Name
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

Recent Posts

On My YouTube Channel

Date Archives