<em>Maxim</em> Writer Says Those Infamous Two-And-A-Half Circles Were Added To His Previews After The Fact

As week one of Crowesgate draws to a close, we’ve heard from a lot of people regarding Maxim’s decision to run “previews” of upcoming Black Crowes and Nas albums as actual reviews despite those albums being unavailable to critics and just plain unfinished, respectively. We’ve read the Crowes’ initial irate reaction to Maxim‘s journalistic gaffe and Maxim‘s lame mea culpa. Nas weighed in, wondering who gives credence to a review in Maxim in the first place, and even the neologism-challenged CNN newsroom added their own half-cocked commentary. But one party we’ve yet to hear from until now is David Peisner, who wrote the previews/reviews/who-the-hell-even-knows-anymore in question. Going on record with the LA Times, Peisner claims his Maxim higher-ups did assign him to write previews, and he only found out they had been bumped to the reviews section when the issue hit the stands.

“I’m a freelance writer. I was assigned to write previews of the Black Crowes and Nas albums. I did that. When the issue came out, the previews were laid out as reviews complete with star ratings. I never at any point or to anyone claimed to have heard these albums in their entirety. Whatever decisions Maxim made after I turned in my work were beyond my control.”

While anyone who writes professionally knows how little control you can have over your own words once they’re in the hands of an editor, the Times does note that the “previews” Peisner was purportedly contracted to pen were written in a voice that sounded kinda like opinion, opinion rendered by someone who had at least given the albums a desultory spin or two, rather than a guy issuing an “educated guess.” But surely that confusion merely confirms the more jaded responses to this (sadly not much of a) “scandal,” that the Black Crowes getting uppity over a middling review just (needlessly?) re-underlined how little difference there is between one brand of generic music mag blurb and another these days, that the blandishments and limp digs passed off as “criticism” are largely differentiated from “previews” by that blurb’s location in the publication and whether or not it’s got little stars or a number grade with or without a decimal point. As this story drags on, the Crowes are rejecting Peisner’s attempts to disassociate himself with his employer’s actions, and Maxim has yet to issue an official response to its writer’s claims.

Exclusive Maxim Scandal Updates: David Peisner Speaks! [LA Times]