@joanmuschampfagnani,

No I don’t use it and no, I don’t read them, even the ones I’m mentioned in. I don’t see the appeal of “papers” and sites like that. If you make it too easy to curate, everyone will do it. I’d rather read a well written blog post that shows me 2-3 important posts and WHY they are important. I read a couple of blogs that do posts like that)

IMHO, etc.=C=

@darrellellens I had to use it at my last company because our CEO had gotten a mention and thought it was great. Our employees had wide ranging opinions.

What I did learn is that I had to carefully review their suggested stories, and make sure I changed the tweet to not sound so canned. By doing that I was able to mostly dig out more meaningful content. I also switched to a weekly instead of daily, but that was to manage my workflow, since curating more took some time.

It did get positive comments from the mentions, but I left before it was long enought to really prove any ROI.

One of the companies’ biggest naysayers on the Paper.li did say he thought I really did it well, compared to the other folks who just tweeted it without careful review.

I have a contact back in Virginia who has a lot of social media clients, and he swears by it, saying it works for them. But, I don’t know what their goals are, so don’t know what they are measuring.

I like Paper.li, partly because I want to be known as keeping on top of things in my niche. I have a tab on my website marked ‘Magazine’ that opens to the paper. I publish weekly and make sure only meaningful articles are displayed. This does take time. I also use the paper.li tool on my browser so that I can add the RSS feed of relevant blogs that I find.

@joanmuschampfagnani Perhaps I have only seen the bad ones.

Also, it reminds me too much of real newspapers, which I don’t like.

I have one and I like being able to curate some of the best content that I think is relevant. And I’ve seen myself being the recipient of inclusion in other people’s papers. 

The key is to focus your content around a specific niche rather than completely random topics thrown together. Social media. Sports. Flowers. Whatever the case may be. If it’s too mixed up, it just becomes an expression for you rather than for the benefit of your readership. Hone it and I think it’s beneficial.

@joanmuschampfagnani @calevans @darrellellens @russellallert @torontocarol @danonbranding   ===  Hey, everyone. I am curious to revisit the Paper.li topic after you’ve had 3 mos to ‘test’ it. 

Do you use it more to drive traffic to your site? Or is it for supplementing the content on your site and benefiting your existing traffic? What kind of ROI would you like to be getting out of it. I hear a lot of people are annoyed that they can’t put their own ads on it and can’t control the content on it nearly as much as they’d like.

Thanks!

@joanmuschampfagnani  Makes sense, yes  It sounds like you would use it for both content discovery (to find things to share in your newsletter) and also to supplement your own blog content. Double-duty is always a good thing.

If I could designate *exactly* the sources I wanted to show up on it (aka “only these 10 people that I follow) and/or limit it to content that was strictly about certain topics, I think I would find it more compelling because it would represent *me* better. I don’t like all the extra stuff that shows up on the page. 

I am still doing a weekly edition and still find it valuable. I am fairly focused with the topics I allow. It does take time, but less editing as time goes on. I read that in future it will be possible for publishers to have their own ads on the paper, which will be good. My main goal so far is to add it to the content of my site, although there have been times that the topics have given me ideas for extra blog material of my own.