Conspiracy Theories Abound! Adam Lambert–19E–Out Magazine
Oh, the know-it-alls at ONTD_AI (they always know SOMEONE in the industry, whether or not this is true, who knows…they did get those scans, which most likely was someone who worked for Details or whenever they print. Hell, I have no clue how this fan group even came about or how many of them there are.) posted this conspiracy theory / inside knowledge / tinhatting (they like that word) stuff. Who knows.
They also use the word benches which is obnoxious. But I think its probably all of LiveJournal and not just ONTD_AI that has their own ridiculous dialect and jargon. Ugh. I roll my eyes every time. Anyway, I digress. It’s still early…
WD sent this over to me and I thought I would post it, given as I can go to work safe knowing I will be getting hits all day on an early-morning Adam Lambert post.
So today I had an interesting phone convo with Someone Who Knows Things About the ADAM/OUT KERFUFFLE. This source, who I’ll call Source, was so interesting that I called his ass back and said “Tell me things. Enquiring benches have a right to know.”
So he told me things on condition of anonymity, I wrote them down, and you can read about ‘em after the cut.
Here is the text of the interview. My source is in magazine publishing, knows people at OUT, and is apparently acquainted with Adam’s publicist. This guy would so get fired if anyone knew who he was, so I will not be providing corroborative evidence. All interview comments are his *opinion*, and mods said it was okay to post this, so please feel free to call him a douche if his opinion hurts your butt. In the Godly way, of course.
You don’t want me to identify you, right?
Right. And keep in mind all this is my opinion based on who and what I know. I wasn’t there.
You’re sure, cause you know pics or it didn’t happen…
That’s exactly what I’m saying. 19E are assholes, of course. Everyone knows that. But the publicist, who is an acquaintance of mine, is pretty cool. Those pre-interview “thou shalt nots”, those aren’t usually recorded. So if Shana has him on tape, that would be weird and stink of set-up. If she doesn’t, then it’s her word against the Evil Empire. Everyone loves the underdog.
So you don’t think it’s likely Adam’s guy said to tone down his gay.
Oh, I’m sure he said “let’s not get all Prop 8 up in here” and “leave the march out of it”. Because Lambert’s not in the business of interviewing his politics. He seems like more of an artistic person who’s gonna want to focus on his album. But sure, it’s OUT, they’re gonna make it political and rouse the masses. So if Roger said “let’s not make it too faggy” or whatever, he would have done that only in the context that Lambert is already out, let’s not pass the Harvey Milk torch right this second. Keep the focus on the artist, not the agenda. You knew the publicist was gay right?
Yeah, I read that this morning. But dude. This sounds like you’re making it okay even if the gay-gay thing was said.
It’s about context. It’s also about manipulation. See, what you’re not getting is that the magazine is not pissed about 19E saying Adam doesn’t want to be the flag-waver here. It’s not even about that. That’s just window dressing. It’s sleight of hand.
Now you got it. See, Hicklin reads. He understands that, like, the Details shoot, that got people all up in arms. Was 19E trying to de-gay their Capital Gay, was Adam selling out, was it art, what? People didn’t really get it. Kinda like a lot of people don’t get that atrocity of an album cover. (my note: HDU, source. H D U).
Hicklin got it though. He got that Lambert is a ground-breaker. And originally, when the article was first planned, no doubt he was looking for more ground-breaking, and then Adam was all “fuck you, I’m a musician, and I gotta cover my ass here” about it, and Hicklin didn’t like Adam’s answers. So he cut them, and he decided to wank about 19E and make it Adam’s fault. Which to be honest, even if it went down just like Hicklin said, would not be Adam’s fault. Your boy is a product, and he knows that, and he has to work that.
Hicklin said they (19E) were very hard to work with and wanted Adam on the cover as a group, with a straight woman.
Bullshit. That’s smoke and mirrors. 19E is always a bitch to handle, but Cyndi Lauper deserves to be in that issue – she’s been an activist for us forever. They could easily have done an Adam solo cover but they weren’t gonna do that for the OUT 100, that’s almost always a group shot. In fact I don’t remember one where it wasn’t. Lambert has that Gaga factor, the love or hate thing? And to be honest a lot of gay men don’t love him. And then there’s the Glambert factor.
People hate the Glamberts, the hardcore Adam fans, like they hated Clay Aiken’s fans. But here’s the thing, those women buy magazines with their boy on the cover.
I think Hicklin wanted a solo cover, he couldn’t get one done between Idol and the album drop. But then, you have a tanking economy, the death of print media, and suddenly he’s not gonna get that solo cover or his major political interview with Lambert in time to save his ass or his magazine. So Hicklin has a lot of pressure to spin, to put out something that will turn heads and get people talking. And the internet is talking now.
I just don’t think Hicklin anticipated the backlash from Lambert’s fanbase. More likely he was hoping for a big “fuck you 19E and fuck you Adam Lambert” response, which would have allowed him to have Adam in for yet another interview and that solo cover, which would sell shit tons of copies. See?
You really think that’s how it went down, that it was all planned out like that? Because Shana seems like a good writer and a nice person from what I can tell.
She’s a very good writer. I don’t know her well, and I’m not saying she’s a big fat liar. I think she asked Adam the questions she wanted to ask, and I doubt if she expected to have to defend herself and her boss. Her writeup was pretty nice to Adam, she obviously likes him. But she knows what’s up, and she doesn’t want OUT to tank either. She needs her job just like Hicklin does.
Okay, I’m kinda done whoring myself out now, so last question. Who fucked up here?
Hicklin, only in his world, he didn’t really. And you know 19E has such a record of asshattedness that he almost got away with it, because it’s totally plausible that 19 would try to de-gay their Gay. They did it with Aiken. Where he sort of not really fucked up was going to town on Lambert the way he did, because it didn’t go over well and might have cost him some sales.
Oohohh, okay, NOW last question. What will 19E do about this?
Not much, probably. There’s no such thing as bad publicity. Lambert’s getting press over it, so they’ll be the bad guy, God knows they deserve it for some of the shit they’ve pulled. They don’t care. Just like Aaron Hicklin is laughing all the way to the bank. OUT never gets this much press. He’s probably in a meeting right now talking about how all this press can only be a good thing, and the magazine is relevant and viable and all the shit you say when you’re trying to save something. You watch. He’ll try to get Lambert in for that followup. With a solo cover.
ETA for background: the text of my first conversation with Source, prior to my informal interview:
(My source) says that Hicklin deliberately waited until over a month after the interview to write his “open letter”, and that said letter was deliberately constructed and worded in an inflammatory way to stir shit. My client maintains that Adam was never contacted personally (to his knowledge) by Hicklin or Krochmal about “what may or may not have actually been said”, nor was Adam warned about the editorial in advance. Adam got the same notice as the rest of the world – none.
My source says that the publicist apparently did warn Krochmal away from the march and uber-political topics, that this is normal and accepted among interviewers and subjects of any orientation, and that the subject was brought up to Adam in the interview. My source says that the request was “not bloody likely” made in the terms OUT said it was, but because it was verbal, “no witnesses mean OUT can say whatever it wants regardless of what was actually said.”
But here’s where it gets interesting. Apparently, my client says, Aaron Hicklin deliberately chose to cut out Adam’s answers to the relevant questions in the print run of OUT. My client also says that Hicklin deliberately timed his “big gay flounce at the big gay publicist and the big gay Adam” because OUT is losing money hand over fist and may very soon go under.
Direct quote: “Hicklin has done this kind of thing before. It’s Perez-like. Nobody at that magazine thought Adam’s people were doing anything unusual, because it’s standard practice for any publicist to give a list of things the artist doesn’t want to discuss. Adam apparently has no filter and talked openly, so Hicklin cut his answers because they made him look like less of a puppet. Hicklin’s in danger of losing his job, OUT is very probably on the way out, and this is a last-ditch effort to move some copies off the shelves and make the magazine at least appear to be gaining some ground. And it will move copies and get people talking, and that makes OUT look more salvageable. Hicklin doesn’t give a shit about Adam Lambert – he’s in this to make bank, and he’ll sell whatever shit he has to sell to get people pissed enough to buy it. It’s just.. he’s not that good at it, or he would have done it a hell of a lot better.”
So.. take it or don’t, but that’s what my source had to offer.
What do you think? True or not true, the Glamberts still get a bad rap, now being mentioned in the same breath as the Claymates. Idle speculation, perhaps, especially from a potentially dubious source, but hey, go to town. This story has almost reached its expiration date. But is this just another way the other Glamberts-who-think-they-are-not-Glamberts are defending their crown prince and exonerating him of all blame, but more importantly, absolving the PUBLICIST–Roger something-or-another, a gay male living from Los Angeles–of everything? Do you think that’s even a big deal? And seriously, is this story even true?
But will any of this actually affect whether or not you buy Adam Lambert’s album?