“Reject” is harder to see than “Accept”
Short answer: It shouldn’t be. When “Reject” is a small grey link and “Accept” a bold coloured button, the design steers people toward accepting. EU regulators treat this as a deceptive design pattern, France’s CNIL has issued formal notices over de-emphasised reject options, and California’s rules require symmetry in choice. Give both options the same size, weight and contrast.
Can the reject button on a cookie banner be smaller or greyed out?
Both choices exist, but reject is styled as a faint link or a much smaller button while accept is bold and colored.
Visual nudging toward “Accept” is a recognised deceptive design pattern and weakens the validity of the consent you collect.
Check it yourself in two minutes
Open the banner in a private window.
Compare both options: size, colour, contrast, font weight and position.
If one of them takes a second look to find, the choice isn’t equal.
How to fix it
- Style accept and reject identically — same component, size and contrast.
- Avoid pre-focusing or animating only the accept button.
How untick detects it
We compare the accept and reject controls as they’re rendered: whether reject is styled as a plain link while accept is a button, their size, text contrast and font size. Each difference we measured is listed in the finding.
Every finding comes with screenshots, the evidence we collected and a fix for your setup. How a scan works.
Questions people ask
Can “Accept” use our brand colour?
Yes, if “Reject” gets the same treatment. Equal prominence means both options are just as easy to see and click.
Does this matter in California too?
Yes. California’s CCPA regulations require symmetry in choice: the more privacy-protective option can’t be harder to find or take longer, and consent obtained through dark patterns doesn’t count (11 CCR § 7004).