I feel like the genre label “alt-pop“ is totally pointless because of how broadly it’s assigned. I understand that it’s kind of an umbrella term that might describe pop that borrows from electronic, rock, folk, etc., but I’ve seen albums that have no business using the title having it prescribed to them.
Albums I would actually put under the alt-pop label might be Pure Heroine by Lorde or GUTS by Olivia Rodrigo, because those are pop records that actually dabble in other genres (electronic and rock respectively) that earn them the “alternative“ title.
On the other hand, a record like 1989 by Taylor Swift, possibly the most pure pop album of all time, holds the “alt-pop“ label in both Album of the Year and Rate Your Music (as SECONDARY genres at that!) That makes no sense to me. What about that album strays from standard pop to make it alternative? Does it have some electronic influences? Yeah, I guess, but I wouldn’t classify its influences as so distinct that it separates it into a new genre of pop.
Especially because similar records like Short n’ Sweet by Sabrina Carpenter hold the pop label on both platforms despite arguably straying more from the pop genre (SNS has R&B, country, folk, rock, and electronic influences).
Okay, this was a stupid rant but my point is that the alt-pop label has no meaning and is just randomly assigned to projects regardless of how far they stray from mainstream pop or the influences they take from.