Not really - there is plenty of popular interest and enthusiasm for history. What I do wish is that the media and the general public were better at drawing a distinction between pop-history and the work that real academics do. There is a lot of "history" out there that isn't worth the paper it's written on, but which sells exceedingly well and wins a wide audience. So it's not so much a matter of the profession being under-appreciated as it is a problem of good history being under-appreciated and bad history overvalued (usually because it's telling people what they want to hear).