My experience looking at, say, the front-page (or more likely these days, inside-page briefings section) of a newspaper, today vs. say 1970, or at an issue of a leading magazine, is that writing and editorial standards have changed, largely for the worse.
Newspapers are an easier direct comparison, and though I don't have a specific example to show (a selection, say, of front pages from the same day of the month across a span of decades would be useful -- 12 issues a year, enough to show trends, but not so many as to drown them out -- would be a good demonstration), but I've done periodic research and am struck.
There are always gradual changes, but a tipping point toward commercialisation and sheer crassness emerged strongly in the 1990s.
For magazines, the larger problem is that so many simply aren't what they once were, notably leading US news weeklies. It might be better to consider a set of political magazines -- New Republic, National Review, The Economist. Possibly Atlantic, Harpers Weekly, and The New Yorker.
And perhaps Rolling Stone as well.
There's some survivor's bias, yes. But there's also been a palpable shift.