So I couldn't actually find concrete evidence that blondes are overrepresented in media today, but it is a common assumption... If so, why?

Is this lingering Nordicism? I would think that overtness in preferring "blonde hair and blue eyes" might suffer from the stigma of its use in Nazi racial theory, but that doesn't seem to be the case today. Did Hitler actually strengthen the modern acceptance of preferring blonde hair and blue eyes? Or has that preference been strong in the West even without the Nazis?

Or is it something more anthropological? I'm not entirely convinced by the "blonde hair is recessive so being rarer, it was a desirable trait in sexual selection" argument. There are many things that are recessive. What about red hair and green eyes? And wouldn't some cultures associate blondes with albinism, and thus as a genetic trait to avoid (assuming they knew albinism could mean health problems)? Is there something about light hair and eyes, or rather, anything shiny, that humans inherently/anthropologically prefer? (Thus, e.g. humans like blond hair for a reason other than its recessiveness, but since recessiveness is the easiest scientific/anthropological characteristic of blond hair to identify, that's the go-to explanation for why it might have been preferred.) If rarity is the strongest factor, then were dark hair or dark-skinned people (before, say, modern European racism took root) consistently preferred in regions of the Nordic and north east Europe (Baltic states), especially in ancient times?

Crossposted in /r/askanthropology over here, where there was some discussion.