>>127288578>>127289199Pop music, by definition and design, is intended to be popular. That's why it's such a restrictive genre. Elements of the genre are designed to maximize its appeal to a wide audience: catchy melodies, simple structures, repetitive choruses etc. I just can't understand why a small artist would confine themselves to such a restrictive genre when they literally don't have to? It's like choosing to create a capeshit movie using an independent film budget.
Madonna, Britney, Rihanna etc were confined to the pop genre because they quickly proved their ability to appeal to very wide demographics -- varying classes, races, ethnicities etc. Whereas smaller artists who appealed to smaller or growing demographics have typically explored club-pop, hyperpop, alternative pop, country etc. Lana Del Rey and Taylor Swift famously branded themselves as "alternative pop" and "country" respectively, because they didn't immediately appeal to wide demographics.
Addison Rae's branding as simply "pop" with no other descriptor, and implicitly claiming to be the new Britney... were certainly audacious choices. Compared to a young Britney or even current pop stars like Chappell Roan or Olivia Rodrigo, Addison's sales are abysmal. With the amount of music videos she's churned out and the size of her creative team, it's debatable whether her music career has been at all profitable.