That's correct. I'm not disagreeing with you that his "stealth suit" doesn't make sense. In theory, he could wear his red/blue/yellow suit, move at super-speed and still never be seen.
Clark Kent doesn't want people to know he's Superman, but all he has is a pair of glasses. Like I said, sometimes you just have to roll with stuff for "comic reasons."
Seriously, maybe I am just tired of entire decades of poor quality comic books, but I really can't find it acceptable that comics writers are still trying to sell cheap ideas as if the concept of superheroes hadn't evolved a bit since the 1950s.
Clark Kent's disguise was conceived in the 1930s, when comics were infinitely more naive and unsophisticated. We (generally) accept it because it is considered an iconic element of the character, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't cause lots of trouble in terms of credibility. Especially as far as Lois is concerned: the fact that she isn't able to see through the disguise still makes her appear as an idiot, quite frankly. That's why in lots of contemporary adaptation she discovers Clark's identity first, or she consciously wants to keep it secret. But - if Superman was created today - I seriously doubt that they could really sell the idea that a pair of glasses is ALWAYS enough to conceal Supes' ID among his fellow journalists.
Well, unless Jurgens writes him, apparently. I mean, the Lois & Clark series was created in 2010s. If they want to give him a freakin' black costume with a giant silver S, it's fine, but Jurgens should justify it somehow. I don't know HOW, but for God's sake, Jurgens was the one who came up with the idea, come on. At least he shouldn't implement in the same series two concepts which completely contradict each other.