precode wrote: Indeed. The textbook example of this may be Entertainment Weekly. They frequently do lists: "The 25 Best ____," "The 50 Greatest ______," etc., and without fail, everything on the list (save one or two token "oldies") will be from the last 20 years or so. This attitude pervades the entire magazine; one week, they gave Soupy Sales a shorter obit than Bruce Springsteen's assistant road manager! I could understand if it was THE road manager; I mean, after all, who the hell is Soupy Sales? But assistant road manager? I wrote them a letter of indignation; they replied thanking me for my input and that my letter would be considered for publication. (It wasn't.)
There was a film magazine from the 70s originally devoted to cinema history before it morphed into an ersatz version of People magazine the following decade. I can't recall it's name but I use to subscribe to it and one week I was reading about Mary Pickford, Bette Davis and the films of Elia Kazan and the next week all of the stories were about Prince, The Brat Pack and the Cinema of Paul Hogan. I realized then that my interests would always be on the fringe of society and that the 70s -- the last great decade of diversity -- had ended.