It would seem, judging from the comments on relevant threads on pro forums, that this is a matter of concern among mixing and mastering engineers, and has been for a few years.
At the moment there seems to be starting a trend back to less compression, with some mastering engineers posting (excitedly and proudly, if I'm not mistaken) that they were able to master their latest with no compression, and posting details.
Anyway, I believe at this point that the whole notion needs to be sold to the clients (musicians and producers) that to create excitement, the best route is less compression not more, because the consumer can turn a less-compressed recording up louder than a more compressed version without reaching equipment (amplifier and speaker) limits.
All this arose partly through the persistent notion that the record with the highest average levels would "pop out" more in on-air rotation and "fool" the compressor/limiter/leveler chain at the station. The reality is that these devices are smarter than is being allowed for and they will bring a less-compressed recording with lower average (rms) levels pretty well up to the levels of the hyper compressed ("spanked") competition.
Another factor contributing to this is the easy and cheap availability of very powerful compressors to all and sundry. The proper use of a compressor is as much an art as any that of any other piece of sound-influencing equipment, and good skills can take 10s of years to develop.
I feel I'm still learning tricks with compression after 25 years of scrupulous attention to the minutae of the task. I had a small a breakthrough today, come to think of it.
