Why are there so many psychologists practicing psychoanalysis today, then? Has modern psychoanalysis evolved so far beyond Freud's psychoanalysis that it became a serious branch of psychology? If so, why is it still called "psychoanalysis"?
There aren't. Psychology (in the US) abandoned Freud roughly in the 50s and 60s, with the rise of Behaviorism and later Cognitive psychology. These movements tried to make psychology an empirical science, with testable hypotheses subjected to replicable experiments. (Obviously, given the replication crisis, this effort hasn't been completely successful.) Psychiatry (the medical specialization) took much longer, until the 80s, but eventually they dispensed with his nonsense as well.
Most talk therapy today entails some form of CBT, REBT, ACT, or something similar, and these have nothing to do with Freud.
And you can say B J Fogg is a more modern charlatan. And Robert Cialdini. But all of them put together very interesting theories!
Being wrong doesn't make you a charlatan. Skinner, to his credit, tried to operate scientifically, by formulating empirically falsifiable hypotheses and testing them. Freud, by contrast, crafted reams of "theory" that his followers were expected to unquestioningly accept as gospel.
They aren't uncommon, but CBT, DBT, EMDR, Family Systems, Internal Family Systems, Rational emotive, Humanistic, Mindfulness-based are currently much more in vogue than psycho-analysis/dynamics.
Rather than a point-in-time analysis of psychoanalytic vs humanistic approaches, there's a deeper, more interesting story in the history of prevalence between the two.
The comment section in a HN discussion won't do the story justice, but to understand the historical picture, I'd recommend reading about how homosexuality was extricated from the DSM and the stories of John Fryer, Ronald Gold, and others. It's the story of the ousting of psychoanalysts from the APA by the humanists and helps set the stage for understanding the landscape of psychology today with respect to psychoanalysis.
About the floating attention thing, that's a very strange generalization ("analysts don't pay attention"). It is about treating all the "material" equally (ie without preconceptions).