"it's sadly ironic that the same news organizations that historically have trumpeted freedom of information tend to produce Web sites that make that information inaccessible" confuses "freedom from" and "freedom to". If you can remember the Cold War, the West gave priority to "freedom from" (i.e. from oppressive government) while the communists claimed they gave priority to "freedom to" (allegedly to have a decent standard of living for all, but we discovered what a lie that was).
In more concrete terms, freedom of information is about preventing those in power from covering up their mistakes and misconduct, and is a prerequisite for democracy. Web accessibility is a social engineering objective, like mobility for the disabled. No-one expects car makers to make all cars suitable for drivers with all types of disability. Instead governments assess the needs of disabled individuals and then make a financial contribution towards the purchase of a suitable vehicle - and have to account to the public for the costs and benefits. The web accessibility lobby is trying to get its objectives met without having to account for the costs and benefits, by pushing the costs on to the budgets of all web sites. In other words, it is behaving undemocratically.