The Mercedes “Less Doors” Commercial

by Grammar Girl

Grammar Girl

At the 24-second mark in this Mercedes commercial (after some stunning images), a man informs us that the car has “less doors.”

There are times when “less” may be appropriate with a count noun (for example, some people think “one less [count noun]” works, and I’ve seen more than one grammarian defend “10 items or less” signs), but the Mercedes commercial is not one of these times. It’s not an idiom and “doors” has no underlying sense of being a mass noun. In simple cases in which you’re choosing between “less” and “fewer,” “fewer” is for count nouns (like “M&Ms,” “doors,” and “forks”), and “less” is for mass nouns (such as “water,” “furniture,” and “homework”).

Mignon Fogarty is the author of Grammar Girl’s 101 Words Every High School Graduate Needs to Know

Advertisement

44 Responses to “The Mercedes “Less Doors” Commercial”


  1. 1 IWC Webmaster September 29, 2011 at 11:10 am

    I’m normally a stickler for the fine points of grammar…but this one doesn’t bother me at all as long as I get to hear Jon Hamm’s voiceover!

  2. 2 Michael Ames September 29, 2011 at 11:25 am

    I chalk this one up to poetic license. “More this, more that, more the other… less doors.” The other nouns were mass nouns, e.g., “power”. For parallelism, rhythm, and effect, the word “less” actually works better here.

  3. 7 Skyler Dobin (@skylerdobin) September 29, 2011 at 11:36 am

    As a copywriter in advertising, I can shed some light on the issue. I had no part in writing the voice over for this commercial and I don’t know who did, but I have a good guess as to why the writer chose the words we hear in the spot.

    Good copywriting is not constrained proper grammar and syntax. We’re allowed to break the rules. Personally, I feel like you should know the rules before you break them, but not everyone agrees or cares enough to take the time to whip out Strunk & White.

    “More power. More style. More technology. Less doors.”

    In this spot, the writer is playing off a duality: “more” and “less.” Yes, in this case it should be “fewer,” but to most people, “more” and “less” pair better than “more” and “fewer.” The latter pair feels clunky. It doesn’t roll off the tongue as easily. Even the Benz drivers would agree (or so the writer might argue).

    The job of a copywriter isn’t to speak proper English. It’s to speak to the target demographic. And truthfully, it can be a lot harder to write to someone the way he or she would speak because there aren’t rules to follow.

    • 8 deanna September 29, 2011 at 11:52 am

      Ugh. Your post illustrates the primary reason I quit working in advertising. “The job of a copywriter isn’t to speak proper English.” UGH!

      And p.s., you need an editor.

      • 9 Guest September 29, 2011 at 1:08 pm

        Deanna, you took the words right out of my mouth. Thank you! :)

      • 10 Guest September 29, 2011 at 1:22 pm

        “Good copywriting is not constrained proper grammar and syntax.”

        … Whereas bad copywriting is unintelligible sentences, apparently. Sorry, friend, but as the “target demographic,” I’d prefer you spoke to me without insulting either the rules of grammar or my intelligence.

    • 11 brien September 29, 2011 at 1:31 pm

      I will sort of defend Skyler for a moment. If an advertiser wants to reach people to sell them things, then poetic license or gimmicky use of the language is fair game. However, I’d be willing to bet that most of the people in the Mercedes demographic might pause at this ad and think, “Well, that’s a dumb ad.” If the copywriters had used “fewer”, the Mercedes buyers wouldn’t pause, rather they would pay attention to the cool graphics and not the grammar. Unless, of course, this car is just a cheap Honda with a Mercedes logo and the target demo is young, first-time car buyers. If so, it could have simply said, “mor kewl sht #merc(heart)”.

    • 12 BigMak September 30, 2011 at 12:20 am

      Thanks Dobin, that was insightful.

    • 13 BigMak September 30, 2011 at 12:26 am

      It’s kinda like McDonald’s “I am lovin’ it” and Apple’s “Think Different”. If you follow all the rules, you miss all the fun.

    • 14 James October 2, 2011 at 12:15 am

      I malagree. Failure to utilize well grammar makes it more harder to bring stuff serious.

    • 16 James October 2, 2011 at 12:20 am

      More and less do not pair better than more and fewer.

      More rain, less rain.

      More storms, fewer storms.

      More work, less work.

      More workers, fewer workers.

      I don’t understand the difficulty.

    • 17 Jesse Ranney October 26, 2011 at 11:29 pm

      Deanna said it better than I would have. I’m just agreeing it was wrong to begin with.

  4. 18 Jo September 29, 2011 at 12:11 pm

    “Less milk, fewer cookies.” My English teacher taught me that in the 9th grade, and I have never forgotten it! It has turned out to be quite a handy rule for me!

  5. 19 Veronica September 29, 2011 at 2:54 pm

    It’s no wonder that so many people have no idea as to what is actually correct; when they hear and see so many instances of bad grammar, they begin to think it is correct.

  6. 21 B. Ligerent September 29, 2011 at 3:34 pm

    Another copywriter here. And I’m going to agree with Skyler (while breaking as many formal, prescriptivist rules of grammar as I like).

    I have to argue that using “fewer” in this ad would in fact have been the WRONG decision.

    There are instances where more formal grammar rules are appropriate, and there are instances where the most appropriate style of communication is colloquialisms and REAL GRAMMAR, i.e. how real (even educated) people normally speak in their daily lives.

    The goal of an ad is to communicate with maximum impact. The more/less contrast is simply a stronger rhetorical play that would have been killed by “fewer”.

    As an aside, languages evolve over time. What’s appropriate in one century may be categorically incorrect the next. The notion of “less” being wrong for count nouns is a blip on the historical radar. It was perfectly fine for most of the history of our language. It’s only crossed into questionable grammar territory for a few centuries now, and I would argue that it’s a “rule” on its way out.

    • 22 BigMak September 30, 2011 at 12:27 am

      I totally agree with you. Fewer doors would sound awful and would come across as stilted.

    • 23 Du December 29, 2011 at 10:53 pm

      Of course the goal of an ad is to achieve impact, but you seem to be arguing that a larger advertisers’ role is to scoot grammar rules out of existence. Since “less doors” is not grammatically correct and sounds rather like a 5-year-old wrote it, the impact here is probably not what was intended.

      By the way, there is a Macy’s ad that uses the phrase “less wrinkles” with no poetic reason for doing so. Neither use is acceptable.

    • 24 TallMan January 17, 2012 at 11:52 pm

      Well written….but the correct use of the word “fewer” is not “formal grammar”, it is correct grammar.

  7. 25 Jess September 29, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    Proper usages of our language is a priority in everything. Improper usage breeds Stupidity.
    “It’s no wonder that so many people have no idea as to what is actually correct; when they hear and see so many instances of bad grammar, they begin to think it is correct.”
    I spend much time online everyday and the spelling and grammar is worse than third grade level. Very disturbing.

  8. 26 k8iedid September 29, 2011 at 11:26 pm

    Love hearing all the copywriters weighing in. As a colleague, I will defend and support the use of breaking rules of grammar… where appropriate. I love finding ways to do it that Word. (uncar. unbig. for smart is a current fave)

    For a different, edgier brand attracting a younger demo, this would be appropriate, but I don’t think it’s in the Mercedes brand voice to be cutesy or wink with copy. Their copy guidelines surely direct sophistication and luxury — and that construction is neither.

  9. 27 CC September 29, 2011 at 11:42 pm

    I want to defend this usage for a reason no one has presented yet, distinct from the idea that advertising can/should dumb down proper grammar to reach a wider audience, with which I disagree.

    However, I do think “less doors” is the good choice from a copywriting standpoint, and here’s why: it’s not that “fewer” would sound too correct or clunky, but that there is a play on words going on here. When I hear the “less doors” part, I picture quotations around the word doors. The writers are cheekily pointing out the very un-sleek, uncool concept of having many doors on a car by juxtaposing it against the words “power,” “style,” and “technology.” More polish. Less whatever isn’t polished. As in, more luxury, less “I drive a sensible beige sadan.” The key to my interpretation is considering the word “doors” to be not a “count noun,” but an idea that conveys the opposite of the other three words; I think it’s a usage that is trying to be witty, not itentionally or unintentionally use bad grammar.

    Especially in the almost sarcastic tone of Jon Hamm’s voice, this comes off as an active choice to me, and I have to agree with the people with advertsing experience who’ve commented that it’s the right choice, even though I hope I’ve articulated the reasoning differently.

    • 28 Du December 29, 2011 at 10:56 pm

      Your comment makes the most sense of anyone defending it, CC. I still disagree with their choice because I believe in respect for the English language (I’m an English teacher, after all).

  10. 29 James September 30, 2011 at 7:15 am

    Agree with poetic license comment.

    “Fewer doors” just wouldn’t be as impactful, nor would it capture one’s imagination in quite the same way.

    But! It’s still ungrammatical, so good on GG for calling this out, lest people start doing it in non-advertising contexts (shudders).

  11. 30 Roland September 30, 2011 at 7:42 am

    Fewer doors sounds okay to me… :/

  12. 31 Heather Hart September 30, 2011 at 2:56 pm

    For all those who said that “fewer doors” wouldn’t have worked, then I would say that they should have left it out all together. Sorry, but “less doors” sounds atrocious.

  13. 32 Kiggidy October 3, 2011 at 10:29 pm

    Perhaps “less” works since they used “more” before, but this grammar misuse bothers me to no end! I would question buying their car if they can’t make a commercial that correctly uses the English language–I don’t care what leeway they think they have.

  14. 33 Ginger October 4, 2011 at 12:55 pm

    Please keep fighting the good fight, Grammar Girl! Every time I hear the “less doors” phrase in this commercial, it makes my ears bleed. My husband quickly learned to mute the sound as soon as this commercial starts so as to avert another “decline of civilization” rant from me.

  15. 34 mignonfogarty October 9, 2011 at 1:40 pm

    I was thinking about this commercial more today and realized there would have been an easy fix. They could have simply said “less door” instead of “less doors.” Then “door” would have been a concept–uncountable–and perfectly valid to use with “less.”

  16. 35 Richard Pickrell October 9, 2011 at 10:59 pm

    YES, YES, YES! I just watched this commercial for the first time, and CRINGED! Then, I googled “mercedes commercial ‘less doors’ ” and saw that I wasn’t the only one bothered by this! Mercedes should sue the marketing company.

  17. 36 Megan October 13, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    The rule I’ve always heard is if it’s something countable, like doors, cookies, or fingers, it’s fewer. If its something you can’t count, like power, milk, or intelligence, it’s less. How is that difficult?

  18. 37 gtv2000 October 23, 2011 at 8:53 pm

    This commercial hurt my ears

  19. 38 judy nessen October 27, 2011 at 10:17 pm

    I am not currently in the market for a Mercedes, but if I were this commercial would have caused me to reconsider. The phrase “less doors” is, to me, equivalent to the sound of nails on a blackboard.

  20. 39 Warner October 28, 2011 at 10:52 am

    When I see this commercial, I just ask, “Doesn’t anyone use copy editors?” It cheapens the product. It sounds like our local sports broadcaster who talks about less strkeouts.

  21. 40 Pamela Haley Design January 22, 2012 at 5:09 pm

    Like… Less doors than a Sedan because it’s a Coupe? Cause it has 2 and most coupes have 2. It’s not exactly revolutionary. Thank you Mercedes for running low on innovation.


  1. 1 The Mercedes “Less Doors” Commercial « The Quick and Dirty | Mercedes Authority News Trackback on September 29, 2011 at 3:05 pm
  2. 2 ZEUGS: Rosa Footballspieler, Grammatik bei Mercedes und die Tea Party gegen Fluoride « USA Erklärt Trackback on October 11, 2011 at 2:15 pm
  3. 3 Wie ein falsches Wort einen Spot ruinieren kann « reklamebüro blog Trackback on October 15, 2011 at 6:09 pm
  4. 4 New Year’s Resolutions–FOR YOU! « Geek Magnet Trackback on January 1, 2012 at 4:07 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Blog Home Quick and Dirty Tips Home     About this Blog From the Store Our Experts

Quick and Dirty categories

Twitter Feed

Our Experts Recommend…


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 95 other followers