Which TV Critic Q&A do you like more?

Every week, two of the most prominent TV critics in the country answer questions from their loyal readers, but they do things a little differently. Matt Roush of TV Guide (pictured) takes questions that are e-mailed to him and answers them in a pre-written column twice a week, while Robert Bianco of USA Today conducts an online chat once a week (usually Mondays, but he did a chat today because of the holiday).

They're fairly similar critics, in both writing style and in likes and dislikes. Bianco seems to be more of a "nose in the air" critic than Roush -- for instance, he was one of the only major critics to express his extreme distaste for Everybody Loves Raymond -- but they both seem to take all queries seriously, and only gently kid readers who can't let go of a particular show, or who like a show that said critic can't stomach.

What I find remarkable about the two columns is that, even though they are put thogether completely differently, is how similar they are in tone and scope. Roush is able to pick and choose which questions to answer, mull them over, than write and edit his responses, whereas Bianco has to pick questions to answer, and answer them intelligently, on the fly. But each does a good job at being thoughtful and fair, despite the onslaught of repeitive questions on the last episode of Lost or Veronica Mars. In both cases, they also seem to enjoy which is probably an unenviable task.

Here's what I want to know: Do you read either or both of these Q&As? Which do you like better and why? Also, are there any other Q&As out there that are worth reading on a regular basis? Let me know in the comments.