I've always wondered if anyone used sharing buttons on news sites and blogs

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Website “share” buttons for posting pages to social networks or messaging apps appear to be used very rarely—one cited study on UK government sites found only about 0.21% of visitors clicked them—yet some argue that’s actually a respectable conversion rate at web scale. Many comments highlight that users often prefer simply copying and pasting URLs, distrust opaque share behavior and added tracking, and resent bloated links, while others note that share features can work well in specific contexts such as native apps, games, or tools that prefill useful, editable text. Underneath the debate is a tension between UX value, privacy concerns, and the real (often hidden) motive of third-party share widgets: cross-site tracking and analytics.

Interpreting the 0.21% Usage Rate

  • Many argue 0.21% (≈1 in 476 visitors) is surprisingly high for any optional action on a site, especially a government site where people come to “get something done,” not browse.
  • Others see 1-in-476 as “basically no one,” saying a feature below a few percent is negligible.
  • Some note the metric is incomplete: unclear how many shares happen by copy–paste instead, or how many “share events” are from repeat users or bots.

UX, Predictability, and User Control

  • A common complaint: share buttons are unpredictable. They may open a social network, copy text plus marketing fluff, or generate long tracking URLs.
  • Many prefer manual copy–paste to stay in control and avoid editing out disingenuous messages or junk parameters.
  • Accidental taps/clicks are frequent, especially on touch devices, muddying stats.

Privacy, Tracking, and Motives

  • Strong concern that share widgets primarily exist to embed tracking pixels and third‑party cookies.
  • Even when blocked by power users, participants worry about mass tracking of less aware users and the social graph inferred from shared links.

Where Share Buttons Work Well

  • Several report meaningful CTR (5–7%) and inbound referrals on social-heavy products.
  • Share features are praised in native apps or web apps lacking obvious URLs (e.g., Amazon app, maps, games, calculators, schedule/score sharing, Wordle-style result sharing).
  • Share tools can act as a visual cue or call-to-action even if users ultimately copy the URL manually.

Alternatives and Design Suggestions

  • Many favor simple “Copy link” buttons or clean navigator.share() usage, especially on mobile.
  • Suggested patterns:
    • Offer both “Copy link” and native share (when available).
    • Ensure links are short, stable, and free of tracking junk.
    • Make shares actually useful (e.g., prefilled train itinerary, game results) rather than generic promos.

User Differences and Changing Behavior

  • Tech-savvy users tend to distrust or avoid share buttons; some non-technical or older users struggle with copy–paste and benefit from share UIs.
  • Several note behavior has shifted over time; share buttons may be less central now but still provide a “tiny but meaningful” share channel.