That's too simple.
The Mail still applies Victorian ideas about social class. As do many of its readers. Remember that the class system depends upon knowing to whom you defer and who you despise.
The aristocracy are to be respected, but are probably a bit suspect, morally, and although you wouldn't make a big deal of it you wouldn't expect them to follow the same set of rigid rules as everybody else.
The upper classes (Social Group A - the Establishment) are mostly to be respected, after all they are rich and have position and power, unless of course they have made their money through entertainment or sport, in which case they are arrivistes and lower class. Some politicians come into this category, but changes in society in the last 50 years have made this a difficult area.
The Middle Classes - these, of course, are the Backbone of the Nation. The wealth makers and decision takers, the managers and the people who make things happen. These are seen as positively wonderful, after all this is the aspirational level of Mail readers (remember that it was described as being written by office boys and for office boys - and where do office boys aspire?).
The working classes. Definitely a split here, in true Victorian style.
Skilled workers, technicals - excellent. The middle classes need people like this to populate their shops and offices and to make their daily lives work smoothly. They pay their taxes (no drain on middle class incomes) and generally don't cause trouble.
Unskilled workers - well, of course, some are necessary. After all, someone has to empty the wheelie bins and fill the potholes in the roads. But they must act according to their station - not make trouble for the middle classes. They pay taxes - but not enough! They should be self-sufficient, because, of course, they could do so much better for themselves if they really put their minds to it.
The poor. Again, two sorts.
The deserving poor - pensioners, middle classes who have fallen on hard times, the victimised. These people need help, and the middle classes are prepared to see them get it, so long as they don't have to pay. Which is why philanthropy is so much better than income tax, because you can choose not to pay it, and pass the burden on to others who are richer than you (see Upper Middle Classes. See them run...)
The undeserving poor - drunks, druggies, the idle, the unintelligent, the sick. Any help given to these people will be grudging, conditional and removed when possible. They really need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. It's their own fault, so no real help is called for, they could sort themselves out if they tried.
The excluded. Those people who are not part of the polity - foreigners, people of other religions (or none), dissenters, those who disrupt the social system - the cosmic dance.
This is an essentially medieval world view, which carried through into the 20th century, and was seriously challenged only in the 60s (see Why the Mail Hates the Sixties). The world is created, determined, all are put into their place. There is free will (otherwise there would be no aspiration) but it is in the hands of the individual to create their own destiny. It is their fault if they do not do so.
The Rich Man in his castle
The Poor Man at his gate,
God made them high and lowly,
Each in his estate.