Home Videos Photos Shop
PerezHilton CocoPerez Khloe K. Selena G. Kim K. Teen Mom PerezTV

Drake Thinks You All Misinterpreted His Anger! He Was ONLY Shading Rolling Stone Not Philip Seymour Hoffman!

| Filed under: DrakePhilip Seymour Hoffman

drake explains his philip seymour hoffman diss

This situation is waaaay more complicated than it ever should have been.

Seriously, Drake just shouldn't have gone after the late Philip Seymour Hoffman being on the cover of Rolling Stone when he had been scheduled for that spot.

But after going cray cray on Twitter about how pissed he was over the last minute change, he's now taken to his blog to explain what he meant about being pissed PSH stole his cover.

You see, Perezcious readers, we all just took it the wrong way. He wrote:

"With today being the 5th anniversary of So Far Gone I figured it's fitting to return to it's place of its origin in order to clear the air about an extremely emotional day. I completely support and agree with Rolling Stone replacing me on the cover with the legendary Phillip Seymour Hoffman. He is one of the most incredible actors of our time and a man that deserves to be immortalized by this publication. My frustration stemmed from the way it was executed. The circumstances at hand are completely justifiable (on the magazines behalf), but I was not able to salvage my story or my photos and that was devastating. They ran the issue without giving me a choice to be in it or not. I would have waited until it was my time because I understand the magnitude of the cover they chose but I just wasn't given that option and that made me feel violated. I apologize to anybody who took my initial comments out of context because in no way would I ever want to offend the Hoffman family or see myself as bigger than that moment. I am still the same person. Today I was forced out of my character and felt the need to react swiftly. These days are the worst ones. Waking up after a great night in the studio and it's your day to be picked apart. After dwelling on it for a few hours or days you will come to the conclusion that you brought it on yourself almost every time. So here I am having that moment. I once again apologize to everybody who took my cover comments the wrong way. I respect Rolling Stone for being willing to give a kid from Toronto a shot at the cover. I guess this is a day to learn and grow.


The Boy"

Hmm, well that's not exactly what Rolling Stone said as they claim they told him last Friday!

Although, it's interesting that he NOW says he respects the mag for giving him a shot considering he is quitting interviews because of this switcheroo.

Maybe he's realized that wasn't such a clever move? Maybe a new offer just came in that he couldn't refuse??

Only time will tell if he makes his way back into mags!

[Image via WENN.]

Tags: , , , , , ,

Celebs Who Should Start Their Own Workout Empires!
Good, Bad, & AMAZING Celebrity Fan Tattoos!
The Sexiest Shots Celebs Have Shared!
This Week In Celebrity Twitpics & Instagrams!
Celebrities Celebrate Father's Day On Social Media!
Top 25 Celebrities On Twitter (When You Take Out FAKE Followers)!

6 comments to “Drake Thinks You All Misinterpreted His Anger! He Was ONLY Shading Rolling Stone Not Philip Seymour Hoffman!”

  1. ... says – reply to this


    Seriously Perez, he had said nothing wrong "as such" to Phillip Seymour Hoffman!
    All he said was: that he would never again trust "in the magazines", because they give up their previous topics to replace them by subjects of last minutes.
    Let us make no bones about it: They do this only because this kind of journalism sells much, even if this is done on the misfortunes of others.

    Despite all this, it remains that Drake seems to be an impressive specimen of selfishness!

  2. 2

    Maybe if he got his holier than thou head out of your a$$ you wouldn't have to deal with your ego comments.

  3. 3

    So, in essence, he's saying "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, I WANTED TO BE ON THE COVER GOD DAMN IT! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA" - One, he didn't write that "apology". Some PR people did. He has a 9th grade education, so there's that. Anyway. He only wanted the interview in RS IF HE WAS ON THE COVER. What he doesn't realize is that he can't always have his milk and cookies like the little bitch silver spooner that he is. He's so fucking mediocre anyways. LOL. "Drizzy" His name is fucking Aubrey. AUBREY FROM THE HOOD! R O F L

  4. R.T. says – reply to this


    It wasn't his call, RS operates for revenue, but I can see where he would have been disappointed. Thinking you're going to be on the cover of a major publication for months (Drake's business is all about promoting his work, too) and then having them snatch it away from you. Why didn't they just do a double/flip cover. Didn't they do that with Naya Rivera and Lou Reed when he died?

  5. gawd says – reply to this


    k perez, can you not read? He didn't say the mag didn't tell him (which they probably did) he said he wasn't offered the option of pulling out his article. And yes, to all the people commenting, of course he wants to be on rolling stone, who wouldn't? Also perez, he said he was quitting mags because of being misquoted on kanye. This is something that happens every day and it actually makes me lol on a regular basis how many quotes are taken out of context (especially on Perez).
    To adg100 - Of course he didn't write the apology; if you think anyone in entertainment writes anything than you're crazy. Also, he completed highschool either this past summer or the summer before (can't remember the date), get your facts straight. I understand if you think he's mediocre and don't like his music, fine. But to comment on someone's name, why just why? Btw, again, most people in show business have show names - why do you think it's a real world?

  6. ? says – reply to this


    Re: michellt – are you frigid?..

    someone who wishes you the best.