A South Korean medical drama is approaching a 20% television rating despite criticism from doctors over its portrayal of their profession. Instead of backing away from controversial subjects, “Doctor X” has continued exposing corruption and institutional failures within hospitals, drawing increasingly large audiences.
The series, starring South Korean actress Kim Ji Won, reached a nationwide rating of 18.5% in its fourth episode, according to Nielsen Korea. It also topped Netflix’s global ranking for television shows in languages other than English, extending its reach beyond South Korea.
The success raises a question familiar to audiences of American medical dramas. Why does a show facing criticism from medical professionals continue to attract viewers? In the case of “Doctor X,” the controversy centers on a story that challenges the authority of doctors while also acknowledging the problems within the healthcare system that make their jobs increasingly difficult.
Airing on SBS, a major South Korean television broadcaster, the drama follows Gye Su Jeong, a brilliant freelance surgeon played by Kim who refuses to compromise when confronting corruption at a fictional university hospital.
The series is adapted from a popular Japanese medical drama that premiered in 2012. Director Lee Jeong Rim and writer Pyeon Seong Geun reworked the original story to reflect South Korea’s healthcare environment following the COVID pandemic.
The drama quickly gained momentum, reaching a nationwide rating of 14.9% in its second episode. But its popularity also brought criticism from some medical professionals who questioned certain medical scenes and argued that the series portrayed doctors unfairly.
The dispute intensified after a practicing physician posted online that a formal review had been requested from South Korea’s broadcasting regulator over alleged distortions of medical reality and the depiction of healthcare workers.
SBS offered no separate response to the criticism. Meanwhile, ratings climbed to 15.1% in the third episode and 18.5% in the fourth.
The subsequent episodes pushed further into sensitive issues facing South Korea’s healthcare system, including inadequate medical reimbursement and illegal kickbacks. The introduction of a physician portrayed as a psychopath also reinforced the drama’s confrontational approach to misconduct within hospitals.
Those storylines could appear to support complaints that the series unfairly demonizes doctors. Yet “Doctor X” also examines the institutional conditions that contribute to medical failures, portraying physicians as professionals caught between demanding responsibilities and a strained healthcare system.
One episode depicts an emergency medical technician who collapses from exhaustion and dies because no surgeon is available to perform an urgent operation.
The tragedy is linked to low medical reimbursement rates, which the drama portrays as contributing to staffing shortages. Hospitals struggle to retain physicians in demanding specialties, leaving remaining medical workers facing heavier workloads and patients with fewer treatment options.
Another storyline examines why doctors who have spent years mastering complex surgical techniques eventually abandon demanding hospital positions to establish private practices.
Rather than presenting those decisions as evidence of selfishness, the drama acknowledges the physical and professional pressures that make certain medical careers difficult to sustain.
These examples reveal the distinction at the heart of “Doctor X.” The series recognizes that doctors face serious limitations, but it refuses to accept those difficulties as justification for corruption or neglecting patients.
That message comes through in a confrontation involving Gye, whose uncompromising attitude defines the show’s central character.
When another physician argues that doctors are only human and have limits, Gye challenges the explanation, asking when the doctor intends to fulfill the responsibilities of the profession.
The exchange captures the series’ approach to medical ethics. Doctors may be overworked and constrained by institutional problems, but those circumstances do not automatically excuse professional misconduct.
This combination of criticism and acknowledgment gives the drama a broader focus than the behavior of individual physicians. Its central conflict concerns a healthcare system in which financial pressures, institutional hierarchies and personal responsibility frequently collide.
The controversy surrounding the show’s medical realism has also drawn attention to its production process.
Despite concerns about certain surgical scenes, multiple healthcare professionals participated as advisers, including South Korean emergency medicine specialist Namgung In.
The production team also includes a disclaimer in every episode explaining that certain scenes have been dramatized and may differ from actual medical practices and regulations.
The distinction reflects the nature of the series as a fictional hero drama rather than a documentary. Its exaggerated characters and confrontational storytelling serve a narrative built around challenging institutional authority, while its medical storylines incorporate problems facing healthcare workers.
The rising ratings do not establish precisely why audiences continue watching. They do show that criticism from parts of the medical community has not prevented the series from gaining viewers.
With nationwide ratings approaching 20% and international exposure through Netflix, “Doctor X” has sustained its popularity while confronting the tensions between medical professionals and the institutions in which they work.
The drama’s central conflict is not simply whether doctors are heroes or villains. It is whether the difficulties of working within a troubled healthcare system can excuse those who fail to uphold their professional responsibilities.
