Issues came out for the first time on January 4, 1971, a fourteen page journal featuring the new curriculum and resistance to the Vietnam war and including an article by William Stringfellow and a sermon by Daniel Berrigan. Its creation had been brought about by events of the previous academic year, and its preface stated, “It is our feeling that there is a real void of discussion on many of the things that go on or should go on at Brown.... We would like to get beneath the surface. We see need for a media which consistently challenges those policies and patterns of things which are inadequate. We intend to seek out those people who are thinking creatively about ways to break out of the lock-step staleness that seems so pervasive. Moreover, we want to be used by people (students, faculty, employees and community residents) who have something to say in way of commentary, advocacy, satire and investigative reporting on campus and community issues.” The first few issues were published by the University Christian Movement. The November 1972 issue carried the subtitle “The Brown Review,” included letters from readers, and introduced departments into its table of contents. “The Looking Glass” contained short articles presenting several perceptions of a subject; “Inner View” featured interviews; “Literary Review” was devoted to poetry and fiction; and “The Last Page” was at various times used for a short piece, cartoon, photograph, or riddle. The magazine appeared irregularly at first, until its editors announced in 1976 that it would “emerge in September as a monthly magazine publishing research, ideas, and creative work from every part of the University.” In April 1978 Issues assumed a tabloid format and a new subtitle, “The Weekly Magazine,” as it switched from monthly to weekly publication. In October 1978, the magazine was once again a monthly. In 1988 Issues changed its interest from literary and social commentary to include investigative reporting of the University administration, and in 1989 the administration was surprised and displeased to see confidential material and private communications printed in the magazine, but, after finding no proof that reporters had used unethical methods of obtaining their information, continued to provide financial support.