people of influence and limited free speech rights

I'm having one hell of a time writing an essay for my legal studies class....
I need to answer that question, and I am so conflicted.
By people of influence, I mean people like teachers, doctors, celebrities, news casters, etc

Here are some of my points that I have come up with so far (I need 3 strong ones for my essay...not doing so well)...

for yes, they should have their right's limited:
-not everyone has the social conscience to be mindful of what they say and not to offend other people.
-If there were no regulation, what would protect those who are being offended from hate?

for no, influential people shouldn't have their rights limited:
-We live in a free country based freedom, and included in that is freedom of speech
-How far would the law go in deciding what these influential people should and shoudln't say?
-Sometimes controversial things open up people's minds to new views
-If influential people have their rights limited, everyone should. They are not being treated equally. Who would want to work an influential job at the risk of being prosectuted everytime they open their mouths???

I originally set my essay up to say no, but after handing in my rough copy of my introduction paragraph to my teacher, she had huge ass question marks all over it. Either she's dumb as a fucking donkey's ass (which I am starting to think for more reasons that just this), or my points really don't make sense.
So, I am wondering what you guys here think. I thought this would be the best place to come for help with this.
THANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!