To be as fair as possible, the old Angling Times of the 50s and 60s was nothing like the paper of today. And if you compare a quality 50s national newspaper with those of today you will see a massive difference.
Angling Times was smaller, with much less advertising. There were sections covering game and sea angling in addition to coarse. It was produced in black and white on ordinary newsprint and the photos often looked very poor indeed. Articles were written by various freelance contributors, in addition to the regular columns of **** Walker, Bernard Venables, Hugh Stoker on Sea, and people like Arthur Oglesby and Tim Wilson on game. For a period, Fred J Taylor had a regular column, There was a whole section devoted to river reports up and down the country.
The main difference was that AT invited any writer to contribute articles, and this they did on a whole range of subjects. Then EMAP launched that great magazine: "Fishing". This was done to accomodate all the excellent, in depth articles that AT did not have space for. It was an excellent magazine with superb contributions from a whole "brotherhood" of hitherto unknown angling writers. The letters page in this mag was vibrant and also full of controversy.
They also paid quite well for articles. I must have done 6 or 7 centre-spread features for AT in the 60s. I forget the amount of money I got but it was almost the same as a good weekly wage. But in those days, AT had a very large circulation, something like 300,000 a week I believe.
Then along came Angler's Mail, on green newsprint! Anyone remember that?
The editor was John Ingham
I did a great deal of stuff for AM in those days. Then along came Fred J Taylor who began a regular column, as did Bill Keal and Peter Stone.
Yes, in those days, things were different.
But were they better or worse? That is a matter of opinion.