No pictures, no touch, no smell, no taste – just sound. That’s all that radio has by which to capture the imagination of its audience. And most of that is done with words. Two separate illustrations of the impact that mere words can have when broadcast on radio emerged last week. One from England. One from France.

The one from England concerns the latest instalment of the age old lament that standards are slipping at the BBC as more colloquialisms and downright swear words, are permitted to transmit into unsuspecting proper British households. The other from across The Channel, in France, bemoans the dilution of Gallic culture. In an attempt to stem the tide of Anglo-American products and media seeping in to the consciousness of  the good folk who live in the land of Liberté, égalité, fraternité (frivolité), the French government have acted to ban the words ‘Twitter’ and ‘Facebook’ from the airwaves in the hope that they’ll go away.

Both cases, of course, constitute attempts at censorship with the goal of social engineering. The reasons and justifications, may be different but the mechanism is the same; remove the offensive words and perhaps the offensive thoughts and deeds will disappear with them.

In your opinion, are either on or both of these bans on words justified? Where should the line be drawn for radio as to what should or shouldn’t be broadcast?

What is radio’s role in shaping society’s mores? Should it be leading the charge for change or steadfastly upholding established standards? Or should it be content to reflect whatever path its listeners have chosen?