I'd add that no computer display has the resolution, which translates into useful area, to simultaneously present the number of separate articles that a newspaper can. Online news sites don't generally put any stories above the fold, and instead have just linked headline digests; you might see a small number stories start to appear below the fold. And blogs present exactly one "article" per page.

The result, I think, is that we get less synergy on a computer screen. A careful print editor groups related stories, or contrasting stories, on the same page. In either case their relationship on the page forms an additional layer of meaning--it creates a forest from the trees. One can skim just the headlines and discern a sort of "conversation" analogous to what you see when you read the TOC here.

I come back again to my point about blogs: It's not enough just to have a myriad of sources. It's also necesary to have an editor or other "digester" to assemble individual items into a meaningful narrative.