Suppose you come across a website which has some amazing graphic work done but the content on the website appears to be poor. Would you prefer to promote such a website? Please share your comments here.
I think content is more important, although graphics are the bait to get someone to start reading. However, once I do read and see the content is poor I'll generally move on.
content is king, graphics comes over next, but graphic is also important to some extent, fresh content is more vital, if you get that fastest you will have visitors even if you dont have a logo in ur site so i vote on content 100%
yeh content is important, but if you have some shitty layout, with shitty graphics, even though you may have fabulous content, no one will be bothered reading it because it seems automatically uninteresting, you need to combine both great graphics and great content to create an effective site
I agree with TAZMART that content is the king, graphics come second. Actually they both support each other. Graphics stop people to read the content and content stops the reader to enjoy reading with nice graphics
content is more important. good graphics helps to gain more visitors while content helps with keeping them! you may like a site with high quality graphics but if there's no good content to it , you won't return to that site cause you've already seen the graphics and there is nothing more to see!
You are always supposed to create good content. That's the point of having a web site. If your content is not good, then no matter how well you dress it, you will have no success. Having said that, the visual impact of a web site is very important. I remember some years ago an article wrote by Clement Mok (a renown designer) where he told about a client that asked him to build a web site that not only was secure, but LOOKED secure. So, the visual aspect of a web site is important. Now, moving to more "trivial" aspects: Social Media... If you would like to have your site or article voted by people from StumbleUpon, for example, it should have stunning graphics (or clever headline) to catch their (er, our) attention. The stumple button is very handy and if the page doesn't catch the attention of the visitor, then you are left in oblivion by a click of the stumble button. In some way or another, this also applies to other social media sites. On the other side, if visitors come from a search engine, they are more likely to disregard all the visual design and go for the information. My advice: Create good looking sites with accessible and easy to read information. It is not that difficult! Hope this helps, Enrique
Both go hand in hand. I think one site that has a few of them both will do better than any site which has best graphic or content and misses on the other one.
In this web 2.0 world, they have to go hand in hand. You could have the greatest Content the world has seen, but at the same time your graphics could be jumbled up and ugly. Remember that the first thing a site visitor focuses on is the graphics and then he/she starts reading the actual text.
I value both! You must have good content and nice design to attracet visitors and keep 'em coming back!
Like what people already said above ... I value both. Overall, content is most important to me, however I only feel tempted to read the whole thing if it also looks good. Plain text isn't the way it should be ... graphics are important too, however content is most important
Sometimes your graphics are your content. My North Vancouver, BC, by Night photo is doing very well on Stumble right now; for the past day, they've become my top referrer. The page this photo, below, is housed on has a bit of text content describing the day and the place this was shot, but the image itself is the reason people visit. Rock and Waterfall, Glacier National Park
Content alone can do very well. I've read papers written by academics, in very plain HTML. All of a sudden the pages are going wild with hits, thanks to links from the news sites. But, there were no ads on the pages in question! Having said that, I think nice graphics can improve all textual content.
i think they're both equally important. without a nice visual appealing design, who is going to sit there and want read your content? regardless of the quality... on the other hand, if you have an eye popping design that makes others jealous and poor content, what's there to keep visitors interested in browsing your site further? just my opinion. I myself, am not much of a writer but i do know what people want when they come to a website and what will keep them there longer. at least i like to think that i do.