Skimming down these replies, I find (predictably despite the OP's assertions that it should not be) a stereotypical "what is folk?" thread, ot, more exactly, "what one person thinks it should be according to them".

That is why, as I've said time and time again. the word should be binned forthwith.

I spent my very early years on the floor of a country pub (when I could escape my mother who diapproved of us both) playing along with my grandfather and his matess. Did we call this a "folk session"? Did we hell, we'd never heard of the term. I learned tras dancing after school and at 14 was invited to what I discovered was called a "folk festival". Unimpressed. we played our violins on the promenade with a few characters dressed in Morris kit. We didn't call that "folk music" either.

I worked at CSH and learned very well what that academics said was folk music and, to a point, they were right.Over the next several decades, as well as writing for various radical journals, I became involved in escalating peoples' struggles and the music produced in their concerts and rallies. Like Pip Radish. I have a right-on foot.

This I'd call Music if the People. Those who prefer anodyne singer-songwriter whining, let them get on with it. Just don't call it "folk music". It is merely a tiny niche way out on the outskirts, of a lamentably ill-defined genre.