I think this particular shift is more reflective of academia at large - it's trendy, and has been for a long while, to "scientize" everything with more experime

I think this particular shift is more reflective of academia at large - it's trendy, and has been for a long while, to "scientize" everything with more experimental data, empiricism and math equations thrown into papers. And analytic philosophy in particular is more adaptable to such a trend since it's often described as being "like science" in its attempts to accumulate tiny stepping stones of knowledge that build on each other. Many established fields, on the other hand, retain a "philosophy of" subset that aims mostly to escape the technical aspects and continue probing basic assumptions. And I think that's a meatier discussion than the analytic approach, which can get very abstract without feeling profound - we have plenty of technical and social developments where ideological assumptions rule by default, because nobody's tried to champion even a slightly deeper approach.