During the interwar period in Japan, became a common euphemism for wars, coups, and other events of a politically sensitive or sensational nature. Using "incident" rather than more specific terms allowed Japanese journalists to maintain the appearance of neutrality while avoiding potential censorship. Prominent examples include the "Manchurian Incident" (the invasion of Manchuria), the "China Incident" (the Second Sino-Japanese War), and the "Nanjing Incident" (the Nanjing Massacre).
Historian Sarah C. M. Paine gave the following explanation for the frequent usage of "incident":
This vague and abstract manner of describing events had its roots in the peculiar form of self-censorship common in the Japanese media of the time. During the rice riots of 1918, a newspaper named the à Âsaka Asahi shinbun had run an editorial criticizing press censorship directed against journalists reporting on the riots. The government responded by threatening to shut down the paper and the à Âsaka Asahi eventually issued an apology. That event, together with the attitude that taking a firm political stance was "civically unworthy partisanship", led most newspapers in Japan to maintain a strict "impartial and non-partisan" editorial line. Another factor encouraging the use of the vague language was the lack of information that the Japanese media had on the details of events as they occurred. In the immediate aftermath of the February 26 incident, for example, the government declared a total blackout of information to the press.
Despite the general air of self-censorship, some Japanese journalists commented on the euphemistic naming of major events. In the political debate that followed the assassination of Zhang Zuolin by two Kwantung Army officers, the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun wrote: