Granted, if you follow a blogger and don't follow a newspaper, then the newspaper's website would gain nothing if the blogger hadn't existed. but is that 100% of the way people find news articles? Let's say I live in dallas, and I google "bloke who got shot on main street" and click the reposted article in the blog and not on the newspapers website, then what? Personally, I think this approach to finding news is more likely from the technologically impaired. So if a blogger ends up higher in a search results page than a newspaper website? In this situation? yes, the copyright infringement is damaging the revenue stream of the newspapers website.
I agree with what you are saying to an extent, but you say it isn't a black and white world, and you're very much correct in that. I think there should be some protection for content creators in respect of the effort put into creating content. I do not think the USA or the UK or Canada or anyone really has an acceptable solution, and I don't think the content creators can carry on as if the world hasn't changed. Not black and white indeed. the content consumers have changed, the content creators need to change, and so do the laws, but I believe content creators do deserve protection.
Always try to do things in chronological order; it's less confusing that way.