There's a difference, to me, in that the above were systematic sex abusers. Access to children for sex purposes was a major driver of their career choices and activities. Those who were primarily musicians, actors, presenters, etc and 'took what was offered' as a perk of fame, if you like, were unwisely sleazy but not in the same category.
Several aged rock stars have now said they regret having been so eager to take advantage of young fans. They were young, probably not entirely sober, and times really were different then (I'm the same age as them). It was widely accepted, for instance, that - male or female - you wouldn't get a record deal without giving an exec a blow job.
Grim, but I agree with the PPs who've said you shouldn't underestimate how much things are changing since #MeToo ... nor how much systematic abuse is going on now, under our noses, when there's a chance of holding back the tide and 'calling to account' the currently prolific abusers.
Patriarchy has always expected its cock to be serviced.
If you insisted on going back 50 years to shame musicians' behaviours, can you justify stopping there? Should you also be going after all the men in the entertainments and arts, in business, in government, in public services, anywhere they could leverage their bit of power to get into a young woman's body? How far back in time do you want to go - are you stopping at men still alive, because it's more than a lifetime's work to call out all the men who've ever done this.
Deplore it and focus on current activities, I say.