Mr. Happy asks "whose tradition?" It's a good question and easily answered. Each folk song has a tradition to back it up. Part of the job of learning to appreciate folk songs is
unearthing the tradition of the song by knowing something about the background of it,
who sang it and why and the history that surrounded it.

Punk Rock is not old enough to have a tradition. Nor is Disco (a manufactured dance music) or Alternative Rock (too nebulous to be defined) nor any of the other commercial branches of the music industry such as Hip Hop. You could argue that Hip Hop has antecedents that tie into the African American tradition of blues, dance music (sukey jumps and the like) and jazz. Even so, the category for the record bin does not constitute a "tradition" of music any more than a robot simulates a human being.

I still maintain that one of the hallmarks of a folk song is that it is accessible. Half to three-quarters of the output of the music industry that relies on extensive production
can't be sung with just a guitar and a voice or even reproduced vocally to the extent that it sounds like "something".

There are a lot of "sham-wow" entertainers today in the rock field who maintain a connection with a kind of image (maybe Post-modern) wherein they like to shock
others, dress oddly, and crusade for their "difference" from the tastes of the general public. Ugliness has become the new beauty.

Folk music tradition survives all this "tude" and pretense. It's carried on because it
is accessible to people who enjoy it for this reason. A good story, a good tune,
a poetic style (not Post-modern), in an appealing and honest voice will find an audience.
An important distinction: folk music lives. Commercial music can become folk eventually in time. It has to ripen.