Following a historical distortion dispute surrounding the film The Assassin(s) that escalated into a political confrontation, SBS drama Doctor X: Mafia in White, starring Kim Ji-won and hereafter referred to as Doctor X, has faced a petition calling for its broadcast to be suspended because it depicts the May 18 Democratization Movement.
According to the National Assembly’s electronic petition system on October 26, a petition demanding the suspension of Doctor X had reached the required 100 supporters for public consideration before its publication. It is now under review to determine whether it will be made public and referred to the relevant committee.
The petitioner argued, “Unlike the original Japanese drama, the inclusion of content related to May 18 in the Korean adaptation appears to be an attempt to force a particular political position into the story.” The petitioner acknowledged that the events represented a painful chapter in history but claimed that the drama had unexpectedly incorporated a politically sensitive issue that remains subject to debate over certain details. The petition called for the broadcast to be suspended and the production team to appear as witnesses before the National Assembly.
The episode in question was Episode 6, which aired on October 24. It featured the story of Oh Sang-beom, played by Ha Seong-gwang, a patient who suffered a gunshot wound to the head during the May 18 Democratization Movement and had endured lifelong aftereffects. The episode recorded a series-high nationwide rating of 19.5%, according to Nielsen Korea.
The episode depicted citizens being attacked with tear gas and gunfire by the military in 1980. One line of dialogue suggested that bullet fragments lodged in Oh Sang-beom’s head could serve as crucial evidence of helicopter gunfire by the military regime of the time. Other scenes showed the main character, Gye Su-jeong, played by Kim Ji-won, and other characters taking bus No. 518 to the May 18th National Cemetery. The episode also featured a fictional former president named Ji Du-seok being rushed to the hospital unconscious, where he encounters Oh Sang-beom.
The storyline prompted criticism from some online users, who questioned whether incorporating such a historical subject into the narrative of a medical drama was sufficiently convincing from a storytelling and genre perspective.
Others, however, praised the episode for shedding light on the painful legacy of modern Korean history and the unresolved trauma of victims of state violence. They argued that turning the issue into a political controversy amounted to excessive politicization of creative expression.
SBS has not issued an official statement on the matter. However, Lee Ok-gyu, the executive producer in charge of production at Studio S, posted the words “no fear” on social media on the day the episode aired, prompting various interpretations.
The debate has also spilled over into indiscriminate attacks on individual cast members. Kim Ji-won’s social media accounts have been flooded with critical comments, reflecting an increasingly heated tendency to associate the political views of characters portrayed on screen with those of the actors themselves.
The situation echoes the controversy surrounding the previously released film The Assassin(s), which deals with the shooting of Yuk Young-soo, the wife of former South Korean president Park Chung-hee. When the film was released, praise for its overall quality was met with equally strong criticism accusing it of distorting history. The disagreement escalated beyond review-bombing and calls for a viewing boycott, eventually leading to a protest outside the home of lead actor Yoo Hae-jin. The actor ultimately requested personal security protection.
Industry insiders and experts have expressed concern over recurring ideological disputes and the tendency to direct criticism at actors, emphasizing the need to create an environment in which viewers can make up their own minds.
Popular culture critic Kim Heon-sik said, “Viewers have the right to express their opinions about the directing and narrative quality of a production, but regulatory approaches such as demanding parliamentary scrutiny or calling for a broadcast suspension are undesirable.” He added that, in an era when audiences can search for information and compare different perspectives themselves, decisions should be left to the independent choices of viewers and the market.
A broadcasting industry source also remarked, “It is understandable that opinions may differ when a sensitive subject from modern history is suddenly introduced into a mainstream drama about medicine.” However, the source added that it was excessive to attribute responsibility arising from the directing and screenplay to the entire broadcaster or individual actors.
Some have also warned against allowing certain online opinions to be misrepresented as if they reflected the views of the public as a whole.
Popular culture critic Jeong Deok-hyeon said the controversy reflected the views of a small number of people seeking to interpret the work politically, rather than those of the majority. He described attacks on actors that subject them to ideological scrutiny simply because they appeared in a particular production as “a form of McCarthyism.”
He continued, “A mature attitude means viewing culture as culture and acknowledging that it can contain perspectives different from our own.” He emphasized that audiences should accept a work on its own terms rather than allow themselves to be swayed by political framing.
Lee Seong-min, a professor in the Department of Media and Film at Korea National Open University, noted that storytelling connected to social issues has commercial potential in South Korea. He warned that if attempts to undermine freedom of expression in popular culture and deliberately create a chilling effect continue to recur, they could damage the fundamental competitiveness and foundations of K-content.
Sources: Daum