The danger is that what will eventually happen is what has happened in America, where the social category of viewers starts to dip because of the lack of edge; and the original ideas go to cinema."What has already happened is that, almost by stealth, the word "drama" has been redefined in television. You can search almost in vain for a play on television, either by an established writer or a new talent. EastEnders and all the other soaps, are rightly classified as drama, even though the quantity and speed of delivery of the soaps and lack of rehearsal time lead to one dimensional acting, however much the performers are praised and showered with awards by the industry itself.But between the soaps and the detective programmes there is less and less space for single dramas, and almost no space for plays. In the theatre the talk for the last couple of years has been of an explosion in new writing. Why has the infinitely larger television audience seen none of it? Why, for that matter is it 20 years since Tom Stoppard was commissioned to write a television play.

Even the once tele-friendly Alan Ayckbourn has disappeared from the screens.While television controllers will very occasionally clear the schedules for an opera first night, and are becoming increasingly attracted towards dance, they take fright at theatre and playwrights. If, as Paula Milne rightly says, it's hard for young writers with little to aspire to, it's even harder for world famous writers, especially the dead ones. Who can remember the last Chekhov play to be aired on television, the last Ibsen, the last Shakespeare?As for new writers, with no modern equivalent of Play for Today, they move inevitably towards the soap operas and the detectives.When I mentioned to BBC1 controller, Peter Salmon, the lack of one off single plays by world-renowned dramatists, he expressed scepticism about the desire of a mass audience for such fare. But the BBC should not be afraid of leading, and should not be afraid of challenging and extending viewers' horizons. As has been shown with the success in costume drama, BBC success will be reflected on ITV.Meanwhile, the controllers could muse on one interesting statistic from broadcasting history. In March 1960, the television company Rediffusion put on The Birthday Party by the then young playwright, Harold Pinter It was watched by 11 million viewers. A month later, another of Pinter's plays was broadcast and went to number one in the week's ratings, beating the extremely popular variety show, Sunday Night at the London Palladium.It can pay dividends to take chances.

Perhaps it is the controllers and heads of drama commissions who need mentors to remind them of the power of plays on television.. On the Today programme earlier this month the fashion editor of The Times, Lisa Armstrong, found herself forced to address the sensational, sexually explicit, nature of catwalk pictures published in the news pages of her paper. Her response was perhaps less measured than is usual for the studiously well-mannered world of designer fashion On the Today programme earlier this month the fashion editor of The Times, Lisa Armstrong, found herself forced to address the sensational, sexually explicit, nature of catwalk pictures published in the news pages of her paper. Her response was perhaps less measured than is usual for the studiously well-mannered world of designer fashion "Most of these pictures are chosen by picture editors - men," she said. "You can guarantee that if something crotchless makes its way down the catwalk then it will be in the following day's papers The fashion editors all tear their hair out." Strong words.

And although the largely female staff on the picture desk at this particular newspaper would doubtless beg to differ (and The Independent remains, in my, not entirely unbiased opinion, the most sensitive of the nationals in this respect), there is no question that Armstrong has a point.Ask yourself why, for example, the Gucci show is such a dead cert for inclusion in the next day's news pages, while arch-rival Prada (often the more fashion forward label) rarely makes the grade. Why does the Versace show grace more front pages than any other? Closer to home, Alexander McQueen is guaranteed extensive news coverage in every national paper worth its salt the day after his show, while the other great London designer, Hussein Chalayan, (who ranks alongside McQueen among a handful of true masters) barely gets a look in.The simple truth is that Gucci and Versace, more perhaps than any other labels, are all about high-gloss, high-colour and indeed sex Both labels boast a serious glamour quotient. Versace even takes the trouble to fax a list of its front-row celebrities to fashion editors before the show even starts. It would be all too calamitous if we were to miss Liz Hurley or Patsy Kensit taking their gilt-edged seats, after all. Prada, by contrast, is famous for a more dowdy aesthetic, a subtle take on female sexuality which has been branded everything from plain "ugly" to, God help us, "intellectual".Similarly, McQueen is a showman who deliberately courts controversy and even favours imagery that is sexually charged to the point of being rapacious. Chalayan's approach, on the other hand, is quieter, more thoughtful; it takes time to digest and explores women's role in society on a conceptual and/ or abstract level.Three weeks into the autumn/ winter 2000 collections, while most of us fashion editors are still in possession of our hair, relations with our picture and news desks are, perhaps understandably, strained. It is true that any so-called "expert" filing news daily can expect a certain conflict of interests News pages tend to be more high-impact than features.

They need to get their message across in the quickest possible way, and appealing to the broadest readership.However, fashion throws up greater tension than most other specialist areas because fashion editors are often responsible for editing their own picture content across the rest of the paper. We commission the fashion shoots for magazine supplements and when we put together weekly fashion reports for the features pages, it is our job, not the picture desk's, to edit the film. If this seems tyrannical, one must consider how fashion coverage is, at least to some extent, picture led. There is no point in writing a column on a particular designer or look, then illustrating it with another.Armstrong is not alone in having received calls from her picture desk asking for words to accompany pictures that have been picked off the wire with little thought for the clothing. In this way, images might make the front pages from shows that no self-respecting fashion editor would even bother with. Sad but true, we care more about the issues of skirt length and trouser shape than levels of flesh exposure and clever camera angles.