Folkways are in peril when there is a concerted ideological reason evinced to destroy them. Much of this is "religious" or "nationalistic". It could be a form of cultural genocide. There is also a kind of commercial imperialism that devalues the folk art
of a society by proclaiming it irrelevant to the music business.

It is also in peril when a movement to proclaim "the square dance" as the national dance of the US is presented in congress. Fortunately, that was defeated.

"Love Me Tender" is a rewrite on the US Civil War song "Aura Lee". It may have some
folk roots but Elvis is a commercial product.

A Rousseauian view of folk music is being confused with ethnomusicalogical and anthropological studies on the subject.

Folk music can be varied in its content as music or verse. Being folk doesn't attribute to it any magical meaning.

It was the American Revival spawned by the Left Movement in the US that fostered scholarship and folklore development here. Archie Green and Ken Goldstein are two
of the leading lights. Of course, the Seegers and as a result Leadbelly and Woody.

A Revival in the interest of folk music can only be beneficial to its discovery.

Brian, of course the words will be changed. Lapses of memory occurs. Whether or not
Profitt actually created Tom Dooley is speculative. He may have just changed what he had heard before. Doc Watson knows a different variant. The point being that the definitions of a folk song belie the single authorship idea. That's what makes it folk.
People change it.

Necrophilia, aside from its prurient interest by academics, obscures that the reason that the story/songs prevail is that they comment on basic human traits in a way that you get from the best dramatists. The songs are propagated, changed and preserved because of the stories.

Frank Hamilton