In this case probably it is Mcn who comes before (introducing only the expression ''son of Joseph'' by who doesn't recognize the true identity of Jesus):
(Luke 4:22)All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. “Isn't this Joseph's son?” they asked.
Then Matthew replaced ''son of Joseph'' with ''son of carpenter'', to remove the allusion to the ''Messia son of Joseph'' in order to fulfill uniquely davidic prophecies about the Messiah. Joseph is reduced so to simple brother of Jesus.
(Matthew 13:55)Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
And, since the proto-catholics were embarrassed by the presence of some heretics (Irenaeus, 3.11.2-3):
...they corrected the relation in their interpolation in Mark 6:3 :but others allege him to be the Son of the Demiurge, upon whom the dispensational Jesus descended
Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us?
Therefore who wrote Mark 6:3 knew already the proto-catholic tradition about Joseph and Mary from previous Gospels. Also in this case, the absence of apology to cover the embarrassment of a Jesus who didn't miracles in Nazaret may be evidence that there was no need of an apology, since it was already known via previous Gospels.