The results of the study are a bit counter-intuitive for me. I prefer to read and write software with <80 cpl, and find it difficult to read programs with longer lines. Maybe the difference between reading articles and software is to great to expect the same kind of outcome. In any case I don't think 95 cpl is an extreme enough line length to be really interesting. It would have been nice if they had run the study with more testing points at longer and longer lines until they found a point where reading speed dropped or comprehension suffered (if there is such a point, maybe not?)
A quick attempt to format the text on the page (via Stylish) to approximate the 95 character per line count recommended by the study: <a href="https://userstyles.org/styles/109432/the-effects-of-line-length-on-reading-online-news" rel="nofollow">https://userstyles.org/styles/109432/the-effects-of-line-len...</a>
Any guesses as to why this would be so? My guess is that people thought they were reading faster at fewer words per line because there was less effort involved. If it were so, I wonder what it should mean for usability? Should you engineer things so that your users are more effective or so that they believe they are more effective?
The result was that the highest reading speed was at the longest line length they tried, 95 characters. They should have tried longer line lengths until the reading speed dropped again. All they can say now is that the maximum speed was achieved at a line length of 95 or greater.