There are historians who operate in the 'present', I was speaking at a conference and one of the speakers was delivering a paper on the 2008 financial crisis and the responses of national governments within the European Union leading up to 2013.

I'm not a modernist, let alone such a contemporary historian, but many of the sources I use in my research, such as chronicles and annals, are products of near contemporary historians. The line between history and present is as arbitrary as the rule of this sub' (where history only begins after 20 years have lapsed). As soon as an author can justify or find a source to offer meaningful analysis of past events it can be quantified as historical research or study. Quite how useful such contemporaneous research might prove is, of course, debatable and for future historians to judge.