I'm researching whether or not to use a link-shortening service for the links created by a new social sharing function on a website. When someone clicks share this page, should they be sharing the canonical URL or a shortened version (e.g. http://vanity_doma.in/VE23jva)?The common justification for short links (given in numerous 2011 blog posts) is, they're easier to copy and paste or they're easier to interact with on mobile. And sure, I kind of agree. But I can't find any numerical evidence supporting those assertions. Another justification from earlier times, theyre easier to tweet, is no longer relevant.OK, so if short links are easier to share and interact with, then they must get shared or clicked more often than long links, right? Is there any evidence for that?
Do shorter URLs really outperform longer URLs?
url;url shorteners