QR Codes is the main case I've looked at where the shorter link makes a difference in the complexity (and therefore scannability) of the generated code.

But otherwise I think it's about traffic and tracking.

First in that you can track visitors to the short link, perhaps in a more centralized place if your org has multiple systems or if you're linking to sites you don't otherwise control. And secondly it's used when tacking on tons of query parameters that would otherwise make it too long even with expanded character limits. And just aesthetically a short link might be more aesthetic in your post.

Imagine seeing "link.short/abcd1234" vs "linksrus.corporate/blog/2025/08/12/the-title-of-our-post.html?utm=something&some-other-tracking-param=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz&even-more-data-in-the-url&some-hashed-value=QXNoIG5hemcgZHVyYmF0dWzDu2ssCiAgIGFzaCBuYXpnIGdpbWJhdHVsLApBc2ggbmF6ZyB0aHJha2F0dWzDu2sKICAgYWdoIGJ1cnp1bS1pc2hpIGtyaW1wYXR1bAoKT25lIHJpbmcgdG8gcnVsZSB0aGVtIGFsbCwKICAgb25lIHJpbmcgdG8gZmluZCB0aGVtLApPbmUgcmluZyB0byBicmluZyB0aGVtIGFsbAogICBhbmQgaW4gdGhlIGRhcmtuZXNzIGJpbmQgdGhlbS4KCg"

> But manual typing is rare

It's absolutely not rare. I can't tell you how many times I sat in the back of a classroom, squinting at a whiteboard, trying to type copy a URL that looked like this: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/12/technology/silicon-chips-...

I think more important than URL shorteners is URL structure. It should work like a directory, where you can intuitively guess what subdirectories there are.

This NYT link is actually pretty good. year/month/day/category/title is pretty nice. The query parameter ruins it, but that's kind of unavoidable if you want a reproducible link with extra data. Usually you can omit query parameters and the URL should still work.

That matters too, but those solve different problems.

Not saying you're wrong, just wondering if it was an option to take a picture of the screen using your phone. In my experience, that's how students tend to capture such info when it isn't provided to them electronically.

"Rare" doesn't mean "non-existent". Some people (such as yourself) might indeed need to type links in manually on a regular basis, but for most people it is quite rare.

URL shorteners significantly increased in popularity as Twitter did. There was originally a 140 character limit that became quite squeezed when adding most URLs, especially to blog posts where the title is part of the URL.

Later, adding things like analytics and tracking (eg: not just in social media, but also in email campaigns) became another reason to use them, especially for those less tech inclined.

It's Conway's law again. Orgs could mint and maintain uptime for short/memorable permalinks hosted on their own domains, but the Web has been captured by a professional class with predilections and goals all their own and which are rarely aligned with the org and the people/purpose it serves.

I never used them for shortening the URL but it helped to give a human understandable name to a link. For example, if I'm linking to a Google Doc, then I can either share the base64(?) link that Google autogenerates, or share short.link/insert-name-here.

It used to be that characters in urls would count for the character limit in tweets. So people would use shorteners to be able to fit more stuff in a tweet.

One use-case I found somewhat reasonable is to shorten to embed the URL in a smaller QR code, especially ones with lots of parameters.

They are useful for putting URLs in print materials like books. Useful for sharing very long links in IRC and some other text based chat apps (many google maps links would span multiple IRC lines if not shortened, for example). They are good for making more easily scannable QR codes.

The reasons I’ve used them are related to easy tracking of stats. Which (short)links I created to this page are producing traffic?

Of course, this is possible in other ways, but note that I said, “easy”. ;)

For an internal organization filled with non-technical users (most), link shorteners are very useful. Each shortlink has an owner, it can have delegates with edit capability, full history is shown to the entire organization.

go/holidays = holiday schedule

go/itrequest

go/ithelpdesk

go/corpcalendar

go/fsckyourself = self-service filesystem healthchecks

---

yes, it is still a little chaotic, and no, it should not be a complete substitute for a well-indexed corporate directory. But it is a really useful shortcut generator for the people that are good at memorizing them, and it costs little to operate internally. Every place that I've worked at that didn't have one, I wish had one.

Go links are a specific subset of short links with a slightly different purpose than services like goo.gl.

And more organizations should adopt them because they are great.

it makes QR codes smaller. /s

Historically there were a lot of CMS's with very small character limits. I remember a war between my high school teachers trying to make their pages work, and the IT department trying to ban all URL shorteners categorically (which admittedly I never understood, given that the DNS interceptor should be able to catch the redirected domain)