The point is does a 54 year old definition hold weight? The answer of course is yes and no - yes, it provides an accurate analysis of where traditional music was in the post-war years and no, events have undermined it, like the word 'gay'. People who use the word meaning bright and joyful are either very old or making a social point.

To be meaningful any musical definition would need a committee to monitor history (formally removing any song whose provenance was revealed) and pass judgement on current issues pertaining to the music such as amplification. 1954 offers only certainty and unequivocation where nuance and discussion might shed more light. In that sense insistence on 'folk' as only orally transmited, unattributed song makes as much sense as the campaign to re-claim gay; fun in a cranky sort of way but largely irrelevant to what's going on in the world. And completely denying any future to what made folk folk in the first place.