Questions After Drake Apologizes for Rant About Rolling Stone Replacing Him on Cover
This week musician Drake went on a rant when Rolling Stone replaced him on the cover with the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman. He's apologized, but still, it begs a lot of questions.
Drake had taken to Twitter to bash Rolling Stone for the decision (the tweets have since been taken down). On Friday, he posted a letter on his blog which in part said he wasn't being disrespectful to Phillip Seymour Hoffman, he just wasn't happy with the whole process (read the full blog post here). Apparently he and Rolling Stone had agreed that in order for the interview, Drake would be featured on the cover.
Which poses some questions: How is Drake able to dictate to Rolling Stone that if he does an interview, it's only for the cover?! Also, replacing one disrespectful (his words) artist on the cover with someone who just died of a heroin overdose. What is Rolling Stone thinking? Have yet to read the full article, but hopefully at some point it goes into the dangers of drugs. Many speculating think Rolling Stone will glamorize Phillip Seymour Hoffman while also cashing in on the news surrounding him. In this new media age, readers are able to get their news from anywhere and it's been a long time since Rolling Stone has been in said news.
What are your thoughts on the whole controversy? Do you agree with Drake who dictated the cover in order to be interviewed? Or Rolling Stone for replacing him to grab more sales on the hot topic?