Forum Moderators: phranque
I am about to carry out a great deal of personal research for an academic / financial topic. As a by-product of the research I'm doing I plan to use the research I do to build a website which I will monetize with advertising.
I'm currently deciding on whether a blog or a static site (run through a cms) would be the best way to pursue this project. Factors I need advice on are:-
1) Is one format better for attracting links?
2) Do search engines prefer blogs / static sites (all other factors being equal)?
3) Do advertisement click-through rates differ between these two formats?
4) Any other factors which may be relevant
The target market for my site would be mainly professionals working in financial fields and students.
Thanks
Marvin
I think a static site (or use a CMS) might be better for this.
Blogs are best for what they were intended for - a chronicle of events, observations, etc. I think the format has been over-used for other purposes. I am constantly frustrated at the inability to navigate technical blogs that contain good information, but the information gets buried in the blog format.
While most blogging software allows you to organize your content by topic, it's often not done or done poorly. And I find it typically difficult to navigate and find what you are looking for. Useful information gets lost, while the most recent (whether very useful or not) gets spotlighted.
Using a static site or CMS, I think you would have more flexibility to lay-out a site that organizes your research in an accessible way.
Now, you may well want to have a blog as part of your site. But use it for what blogging was intended for. If you want to chronicle the process of your research, for example, a blog would be an ideal format for that part of your site.
