Which was really more faithful to an Argentine rock song of the 1980s

[tahasozgen]

The following paragraph is an excerpt from the Economist, July 3, 2021. The paragraph is about the identity of the South American people.

"Bello, Mestizaje, Reality and Myth
"Mexicans emerged from indigenous people, Brazillians emerged from the jungle, but we Argentines arrived on boats. On boats from Europe." So said Alberto Fernández, Argentina's president, last month. It was meant as a friendly nod to Pedro Sánchez, Spain's prime minister, who was sitting beside him. Two decades ago the comment, which Mr Fernández attributed to Octavio Paz, a Mexican poet, but which was really more faithful to an Argentine rock song of the 1980s, would have gone unremarked. Not now: many took offence."

Dictionary
unremarked: not having an identifying mark “unmarked cards”, not taken into account “his retirement was not allowed to go unmarked”
take offence: to be offended (by something)


I cannot understand the bold phrase of the sentence below:
"Two decades ago the comment, which Mr Fernández attributed to Octavio Paz, a Mexican poet, but which was really more faithful to an Argentine rock song of the 1980s, would have gone unremarked."

Does the word "faithful" means to "connected, bonded, dependent, attached, related" in this sentence?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Ostap]

Does the word "faithful" means to "connected, bonded, dependent, attached, related" in this sentence?

Faithful here is used in the sense of true/exact/accurate. Meaning, the rock song is a much more probable source of the comment than the Mexican poet.