Sorry, there seems to be some confusion & I prob wasn’t clear - I never said he wasn’t rich, the whole first part is a comment on the stupid article headline, the subject I was replying to (if anything, that it wasn’t clear from the headline that he was rich).
They had his ID, they could have just said ‘rich guy’ instead of driver.
This makes more sense, now I understand what you mean. I think they use “mercedes driver”, because it paints a picture. “Mercedes driver” implies not only “rich”, but also “entitled”, “anger management issues” and “difficulty with following road laws”.
And at the same time it allows the reader (who might share some of these characteristics) to still claim moral superiority over that guy (“At least I don’t drive a Mercedes”).
It is, in fact, a very clever headline that does quite a lot with very little.
It does so using stereotypes and prejudices, and that might totally be seen as despicable. But I wouldn’t call it stupid.
(In fact, labelling him as a “rich driver” does quite a similar thing. His wealth itself doesn’t really matter for the story, unless you want to evoke the connotations of “entitled”, “thinks he is above the law” and “gets away with doing things poor people could not get away with”, while allowing people who share some of these characteristics to still claim moral superiority (“I’m not a rich asshole like that guy”).)
Sorry, there seems to be some confusion & I prob wasn’t clear - I never said he wasn’t rich, the whole first part is a comment on the stupid article headline, the subject I was replying to (if anything, that it wasn’t clear from the headline that he was rich).
They had his ID, they could have just said ‘rich guy’ instead of driver.
This makes more sense, now I understand what you mean. I think they use “mercedes driver”, because it paints a picture. “Mercedes driver” implies not only “rich”, but also “entitled”, “anger management issues” and “difficulty with following road laws”.
And at the same time it allows the reader (who might share some of these characteristics) to still claim moral superiority over that guy (“At least I don’t drive a Mercedes”).
It is, in fact, a very clever headline that does quite a lot with very little.
It does so using stereotypes and prejudices, and that might totally be seen as despicable. But I wouldn’t call it stupid.
(In fact, labelling him as a “rich driver” does quite a similar thing. His wealth itself doesn’t really matter for the story, unless you want to evoke the connotations of “entitled”, “thinks he is above the law” and “gets away with doing things poor people could not get away with”, while allowing people who share some of these characteristics to still claim moral superiority (“I’m not a rich asshole like that guy”).)