[urq] NAC: Spy photographers : myth or reality ?

[Louis_Alain_Richard at computerhorizons.com]

I was having a discussion with a friend, and we had a gentle argument about
the so called "spy" photographers.

I ,for one, don't believe these guys really exists. Or, if they really do,
they just put their name on a shot that some manufacturer sent them. They
are in fact a PR agency for the manufacturers.

My arguments are:

1- If they wanted, it would be real easy for a car manufacturer to "test"
their mule in a remote location where no Hans Lehmann, Brenda Priddy or Jim
Dunne are waiting, hidden in a cache with a 3 ft long zoom.

2- Anybody had actually talked, seen or can confirm their existence ?

3- Strangely, we never see shots of the "test mules" broken, in fire, in a
ditch or in any unfavourable position. The cars are always "...cornering
agressively at the Nurburgring", "...enduring successfuly hot weather
testing", "...experiencing the most extreme cold of the year", etc. These
cars are amazingly reliable, for test mules, no ?

4- After all these years, even my mother would know that a car with tape
over the rear lens is a "disguised test mule". Then, if I was a car
manufacturer, I would have found a way to disguise my cars in less evident
way !

5- And the massive argument : To whom this "spy" shot is profitable ? Who
is gaining media interest for "free" ? Answer this question and you have
the proof that they are bogus.

So, any takers to defend the reality of the spy shots ?

Louis-Alain