Any help with these two would be great!

1.

Some 500 years ago Luther used the printing press to spread his ideas in a world where either the King or Church deemed what was appropriate knowledge and a correct belief or values system. In his novel 1984 George Orwell warned us about double think: "ignorance is knowledge, war is peace, and slavery is freedom". A bumper today sticker says: "Freedom of expression is hate speech". In the context of the net explain what is freedom of expression in both the Canadian and American contexts, any limitations in both contexts how the law does or does not address it on the net. Kindly cite any supporting regulatory, statutory or juridical decisions.

2.

Barbara Kay, a commentator in the National Post on 13 April 2016 recently quoted from Professor Neuman's blog (he is a philosophy professor at Trent University). The blog posting said:

"(My aim is to) help the Palestinians (and) I am not interested in the truth, or justice, or understanding, or anything else, except so far as it serves that purpose...If an effective strategy means that some truths about the Jews don't come to light, I don't care. If an effective strategy means encouraging reasonable anti-Semitism, or reasonable hostility to Jews, I also don't care. If it means encouraging vicious racists anti-Semitism or the destruction of the state of Israel, I still don't care"

From the point of view of freedom of expression, the net, social media and the law discuss whether the blog positing is legally problematic and why? If Prof. Neuman made these comments on Toronto Star or National Post or Globe and Mail website / comments section, would those newspapers have any legal obligation? Why?