Guardian divides over ITV drama The Hack as critics question depiction of its newsroom

Two-star reception for ITVX drama The Hack has sparked renewed scrutiny of the Guardian's handling of its own journalism history. Lucy Mangan's review, published in the Guardian, awarded the seven-part series two stars out of five and described the drama as “remarkably dull” in execution while tracing the paper's 15-year investigation into phone hacking that helped topple News of the World. The Hack dramatizes the Guardian's pursuit of the story and its aftermath, which culminated in the closure of a Rupert Murdoch-owned title and spurred broader media-regulatory debates. The first episode aired Wednesday evening on ITVX, launching what critics have called a marathon portrait of newsroom culture.

In a column for the Daily Mail, Stephen Glover questions why a paper that prides itself on liberal certainties would deliver such a negative assessment. He argues that The Guardian is a good newspaper but a tank of internal divisions, citing past debates over issues from slavery and transgender rights to the sale of the Observer. The piece notes that in The Hack, Nick Davies is depicted as a saint and the paper's reporting machine is cast in heroic terms, while journalists tied to Rupert Murdoch’s outlets are cast in much darker light. The column adds that Guardian editor Katharine Viner did not roll out the red carpet for the drama, even though the project originated with writer Jack Thorne.

The piece goes on to describe a tension-filled portrayal of newsroom figures, suggesting that the drama elevates certain personalities while sidelining others who helped shape the real investigation. Glover also points to the Guardian’s current editor as a central figure in the paper’s internal dynamic, arguing that a clash of perspectives between Viner and former colleagues is part of a broader narrative about how the paper handles its own legacy. The Guardian’s portrayal of Alan Rusbridger, Davies and their contemporaries is depicted as a source of friction within the institution, according to the column. Critics familiar with the era say the show leans into a heroic gloss, a framing that has drawn pushback from some who lived through the hacking scandal.

Beyond the on-screen tensions, the column touches on the real-world frictions surrounding the Guardian’s finances and strategy. Glover notes years of losses for the Guardian Media Group, counterbalanced by a sizable cash reserve built up through prior investments. He recalls a controversial offshore tax shelter used in 2007 to avoid taxes on profits from the sale of Auto Trader shares, an episode the piece says the Guardian has not fully reconciled with its current leadership. The Observer’s sale at the end of last year, described by some as undertaken against earlier guarantees, further underscores the paper’s ongoing strategic recalibration. Internal debates over artificial intelligence usage, digital design, and newsroom culture have also sparked dissent among staff, with high-profile resignations and protests shaping the broader context in which The Hack is being released.

Glover’s column frames The Hack as a rare cultural artifact: a dramatic portrait of a newspaper that helped to redefine investigative reporting, now being reassessed by the public through a television lens. The drama’s reception—an ambitious, seven-hour chronicle that some viewers find dense or indulgent—adds another layer to the conversation about how journalism’s past is remembered in contemporary culture. The Guardian, for its part, remains a central institution in British media, even as it navigates internal divisions and external pressures. The debate over The Hack thus sits at the crossroads of entertainment, memory, and accountability, raising questions about how the media should narrate its own most consequential chapters while continuing to pursue rigorous, independent reporting.

In the end, The Hack may not rewrite history, but it has already sparked a high-intensity discussion about the reliability of its portrayal and the integrity of the institutions it depicts. For observers, the real measure will be how audiences receive the drama, how editors respond to the reception, and how the Guardian and other outlets reflect on a moment when journalism itself became both subject and storyteller in a public conversation about power, ethics, and the future of the press.