Whether it's likely to pass into oral tradition isn't relevant to Ron's question. He was asking about what sort of audience it got, or could get. The label "contemporary folk" does in fact identify it to most English-speaking people who might be interested, and agonizing about whether it's "folk" is like complaining that vegetarian haggis isn't haggis.

There have been no innovations in the genre for forty years. The stuff now being put out by singer-songwriters in their 20s sounds indistinguishable from what singer-songwriters in their 20s were producing in 1970. So it has no problem attracting an audience of wrinklies. Whether it can attract much of a youthful one is more dubious.