To be fair to the editors, they have the unenviable problem of a readership that is very diverse in its knowledge and experience.
There will be those who are just thinking about booking a trial lesson.
There will be some new bunnies who will want to know how to make a decent landing, particularly in the light of some pretty appalling stories we hear about quality of some instructions.
There will be others who have 100 - 150 hours under their belts and have flown N, S, E and W and now want to spread their wings and venture abroad. They want to know about Le Touq and customs clearance. Others in this experience range want to think about IMC or IR, aerobatics, twins, tail dragging, floats etc.
Then the 250-500 hours guys who feel ready to take a longer, more interesting trip...to the Arctic Circle, or St Petersburgh or North Africa. These people might be thinking about a CPL or ATPL.
Then there are the 1,000+ hour pilots who really want to be stimulated...read about Polly Vacher's exploits, or flying the Antarctic Survey, or maybe build their own strip or their own aircraft, or convert to turbine or rotary.
It would be impossible for any mag to satisfy all these people in every article.
There already is some differentiation between the mags (I see Flyer as being more taildragger and Pophamy, whereas Pilot is more Mooney and Bigginy, I have never looked again at Today's Pilot since the first edition was such crap), but unless we have mags for every different Niche "Today's 500-1500 hour taildragger Pilot with his own strip who is thinking of building his own" we are all going to have to compromise.
My 2p worth anyway.
W