There's Been Some Misunderstanding...

Jazz history was always misunderstood--just in different ways by living generations. In the 1920s, older generations--perhaps born mid-late nineteenth century probably hated it, younger generations born in the late 90s and 00s might know nothing or have no appreciation for bebop or jazz fusions. 

Jazz has always been a player's milieu and was nerdy before the word was invented. One thing that is unique about jazz is its reverence for a wide range of music history--particularly classical music. Now we have lost lots of the understanding of music history, both as players and listeners.

When I was first studying jazz, I'd investigate everything I could get my hands on. But had social media existed then I might not have. Everything is now mediated by public opinion and is what people value before anything else.

To be deeply influenced by history typically involves intense reading and research--at least with writers. If you wanted to know everything about a topic or about someone you admired, you'd read all the things they read. But technology also has made parts of history available that would not have happened otherwise. Isaac Newton had an intense interest in alchemy, and now historians are reading through his alchemical manuscripts as a way of investigating what he investigated. (See chymistry.org)

Perhaps there are similar manuscripts by baroque and classical composers that first discovered "jazz" before the word was coined. Once you know all that others knew (and applied) you realize the misunderstanding. More people would like jazz by understanding it. But understanding is typically a "pull" phenomenon. "Pushing" understanding doesn't necessarily lead to it.