Some years ago, it was usual to see a list of articles in the homepage of any website with a link often called "View more".

Nowadays it's difficult to find a website using this link, I noticed that often they create a link in a "title section".

I want to know your opinion about this subject. Does anyone has experience with this? Is there any research about it?

Take a look at the imagem below:

enter image description here

  • I get newsletters with such links, like this one by ZDnet. The link text is "READ FULL STORY", but it's the same thing.
    – Juan Lanus
    Oct 24, 2012 at 21:18
  • @JuanLanus that's not that I'm talking about, take a look at the image uploaded. You'll understand.
    – Osny Netto
    Oct 25, 2012 at 2:13
  • OOps, sorry! Yes, I have seen view more as a means to filter audiences. Like for example a site has cars and bikes, but the page has not enough space to show them all. One can show a few of each class and let the user click in order to jump to an all-cars or all-bikes page. The view more link (with the appropriate wording) routes each user into his preferred demographic class. When I remember where it is I'll get back to you with an example.
    – Juan Lanus
    Oct 25, 2012 at 12:41
  • 1
    cnn.com ansd google.com/news still has these; it just shows the top 5 or so stories in each category, with a "more stories" or similar link. ABCnews, NBCNews, and news.bbc.co.uk on the other hand, don't have an explicit 'more' link, but clicking on their category headings does the same thing (which is also the case with the two previous sites); the functionality is still there, but perhaps they expect that their users are now familiar with this 'category-items' idiom.
    – BrendanMcK
    Oct 26, 2012 at 5:40

3 Answers 3


I'd say "View More", "Read more" and such are still being used when there is a constrain in space. You want to show a series of elements, but your list is much longer, so you use a link to suggest the user that there is more to see.

Another example would be:

  • News 1
  • News 2
  • News 3

    And 10 more news...

"View More" and "Read more" are probably not used that much any more, mainly because they don't mean anything and links are supposed to explain something about their content. The 'correct' use would be something that has a meaning by itself, rather than a word that gives the user no idea of what the link contains (and imagine someone who can't see and is using a browser that reads all the content).

It's still ok to let the user know that there is more related information. It's not good practise to do using a phrase that means nothing by itself.


In this case, I'd suggest to call it "View all".

  • This unambiguously tells the user that there is only a selection of articles listed (too).
  • It's assured that there is a full list of articles accessible (while "View more" could mean that you'd only get 5 more).
  • The selected articles are included on the View-all-page, too.

Because the additional article links are not inserted on the same page, you should style the "View all" as a hyperlink, to tell the user that a new page will be loaded.

The sum of all articles could be included in the link (e.g. "View all (27)"). If the selected articles are the only articles yet, you should still add a link to the View-all-page (because it might be useful), if it is not linked prominently at another place, e.g. in the heading (in this case I'd omit the link). Maybe you could use "View all (22 more)", and in the case of no additional articles, just "View all", but I'm not totally sure about it; I'd prefer the variant with the total sum.

For accessibility, you might want to include the article type in the link, e.g. "View all Sports articles" resp. "View all Sports articles (27)". Why? For example because some screenreader users use a link list, which lists all links on a page. If you'd omit the article type, the screenreader would read several links with the same description ("View all", "View all", "View all"), and it would not be clear to the user what kind of articles are behind which link. If the article type is included, you could also simply use "All Sports articles".

  • Good discuss, but you suggest leave this link there or just a link in Category name is suficient? Like abcnews.go.com they don't show this kind of link at boxes.
    – Osny Netto
    Oct 26, 2012 at 11:27
  • 1
    @Osny: You wonder if linking the heading is sufficient? I think it depends on the site. If it is the main content of the page, I'd say that you don't need an additional "View all" link. However, you should style the heading as a link (not the case at abcnews.go.com). If it is only displayed in a sidebar, a "View all" link might be more important. Also it depends on the content: on a news site, it's not so typical to get a list of ALL articles of a section. On a blog site instead it's common.
    – unor
    Oct 26, 2012 at 13:52

The old "View more" convention that simply adds to the displayed list is inefficient and outdated. I suspect it was a misguided attempt to deal with very slow connection speeds of the 90s. Or maybe it was the result of very limited software on the server. The more modern and useful convention that replaced it is that of pagination, used google, this site, most blogs and bbs:

enter image description here

  • I understand you. But in my case, i'm using more then 6 blocks of articles, so I thought pagination isn't a good practice. Take a look at new imagem that I uploaded.
    – Osny Netto
    Oct 25, 2012 at 11:30
  • Osny, are you going to add to a list and make it scrollable or expand the list height?
    – obelia
    Oct 25, 2012 at 14:19
  • No, this image is exactly my home page, clicking in "view more" go to "section page", loke "tecknology page". It's like most website that we have see on the web.
    – Osny Netto
    Oct 25, 2012 at 16:04
  • @Osny - Oh now I get it. It's fine link to a whole page on the subject, but it's better to be more explicit: "More articles on technology", etc. news.google.com does exactly this, but it's not arranged in a grid.
    – obelia
    Oct 26, 2012 at 1:04

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.