|
 Actually,
the second issue of The DayAfter was also its first formal issue. It
was released, as promised, by the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi,
with a beaming smile, at his residence on July 17. That is the day we
observe every year as the birthday of The DayAfter.
The cover of the July 1985 issue carried a big portrait of Rajiv
Gandhi. The photograph was taken by me. It had other smaller
photographs of three persons totally different from one another in all
respects. They were Ronald Reagan, a Hollywood filmstar-turned-President
of the United States of America; Comrade Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet
leader who was later to preside over the liquidation of the Soviet
Empire and Khushwant Singh, the undisputed master of quip, controversy
and telling humour in Indian journalism.
Both politically and socially, the magazine was bold, free, frank and
daring. It attempted a frank analysis of the Global Image of Rajiv
Gandhi, raised questions about burning and angry issues like
Ghallooghara, a Punjabi word meaning “massacre”, the militant
Kolhanistan movement, which analyst Ess Bose called “treason” and a
broad survey of the internal instinct of violence among human beings
in the story “I Kill You If....” in which Khushwant Singh, Vasant
Sathe and Subramaniam Swamy were among those questioned face to face
by our reporter, Manas Manoj. Khushwant Singh, in his inimitable style
had said: “I have a long list of people I would like to see dead.” The
DayAfter sought to investigate what can make someone take the life of
another human being.
Two things distinguished The DayAfter issue of July 1985, released by
Rajiv Gandhi. One, every theme and headline was investigative and
daring; second, some of the most fearless and courageous journalists,
both young and old, had already decided to pitch in with The DayAfter.
Although we had a nominal editor, we had the backing of a battery of
senior journalists who chipped in with interviews with Rajiv Gandhi
and assessment of his foreign tours and global image. We had very
strong cultural and social content also. We had a special photo
coverage of the Festival of India at the Kennedy Centre in the United
States of America, we had an interview with Anup Jalota by Dibang now
famous TV star of "Aaj Tak", both of whom were to become more and more
famous in their chosen fields in the years to come. We had a revealing
story about Mehmood Hussain and his daring film “Unwanted II” dealing
with the theme of rebellious youth and militancy. Kumar Bhartendu, one
of the leading film critics of India, had done that story and also
introduced Mandakini, the heroine of the film which made ripples at
the Cannes Film Festival. I will not reveal who Kumar Bhartendu is. Of
course, many of cinema’s oldest and greatest critics and stars do know
his real identity. We had a well-researched investigation into “Women
and Freedom Struggle” by Sudha Dutt, which was translated from the
original Hindi by Yogendra Bali himself. We had Dinesh Kampani’s
touching story about the plight of the members of the old royal family
in penury, living on the New Delhi Railway Station platform. We had a
biting story by Pankaj about DTC (Don’t Trust Us). There were other
sharp-edged stories on sports, business and governance.
In that issue, I had promised the readers that “Their valuable
suggestions will be incorporated to further improve the magazine, both
in content and quality.” Taking the readers into confidence, I had
shared with them my emotions and intentions, honestly and frankly, on
my experience of the May issue. I had said, “We can now look back with
reasonable satisfaction that The DayAfter, an endeavour by young and
progressive journalists, has taken a small leap forward towards its
set goal to inform, educate and objectively criticise the policies and
programmes in the best democratic traditions. An unceasing effort is
sought to be made to enlarge the perspective of the contents in The
DayAfter to attract readership of varied interests and liking. With
that in view the current issue offers all that, which perhaps could
not be included in the previous issue.”
I had mentioned that “we are conscious of the fact that there may
still be shortcomings for which the best judge, in our opinion, is the
reader himself. And we always keep our options open.”
Call me presumptuous if you will but look back. We have kept the
promise.
|
