There is a striking quotation from the report Journalism.co.uk on the Facebook "new class of new applications" published today:
"When we worked with various news organizations, there were two camps: people who wanted to bring the social experience on their sites, like Yahoo [News] and the self, and those who wanted the experience of new social Facebook, The Guardian, Washington Post and the Daily, "the head of Facebook Platform partnerships Christian Hernandez told Journalism.co.uk.
So which is better? A first set of applications to The Independent and The Guardian seems to show the difference too. Here, for example, Facebook is the widget as it appears in The Independent - or rather, like almost sounds like: a variety of other editorial and business decisions to push the envelope:
It seems that the application will have the independent news for users.
What's going on here? Well, from a user perspective, unless you are on the guardian application page or The Independent, the two applications work exactly the same way: if a friend is to read an article about the two, appear in food.
What is the difference? If independent, the friend to read it on the site after login to Facebook app. In the case of guardian, they could read on the page app.
So in both cases, the editor will ask users to "join us". If the address begins with the facebook.com or independent.co.uk - it is always just a click away.
Of course, this does not mean they are taking for new users. Both have various Facebook pages, which allows users to directly see the stories in their news feeds, and The Independent makes it particularly well, as mentioned above.
The two also like / Send buttons distributed freely throughout your site.
So why install the standalone application? To see what your friends are reading while you're on their site (if you scroll a bit), and reduce the effort required to say what you read.
Why is the Guardian to install the app? This also reduces the sharing of management efforts (both assumed the distribution of applications by default), but also to get a populist and socially affected taking into account the region.
In other words, they become more or less done the same, with the main difference is that The Independent, your Facebook friends are playing a small part of the mix of writing, and The Guardian, that is - with the widest "Most Popular" stories - the only part of the editorial mix. (For a different editorial mix, you can go to the website of The Guardian - but you will be the flow of absent friends ").
It is a further important ingredient here, however - and this is the Facebook stream mentioned above. Guardian with the application, I can see all the new friends are reading and have access to all the other features like Facebook chat and messaging. And it makes a big difference.
But I also feel "cut" of the whole, less popular content Guardian, and functionality of your application to The Independent does not suffer.
Therefore, it comes down to what kind of mixture of writing to use as a reader. And it may well be a place for both. However, new users will find in the end anyway.