I wonder which is the actual core issue people (end users) concerned about data privacy are claiming:
None of these: it's a matter of principle.
As Professor Ugo Mattei¹ explains well, after the degradation of social and individual rights, the violation of privacy represents the first step towards the loss of sovereignty over one's body.
[1] from Wikipedia: "Ugo Mattei is Professor of International and Comparative Law at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, in San Francisco, California, and a full professor of civil law in the University of Turin, Italy. He is the academic coordinator of the International University College of Turin, Italy, a school where issues of law and finance in global capitalism are critically approached. [...] For his ground-breaking studies on the commons, in 2017 Mattei won the Elinor Ostrom Award for the Collective Governance of the Commons.
I don't understand what your example has to do with #privacy.
Of course it's politics. Politics exists wherever there is interaction between individuals. The use of the word "politics" in a derogatory sense is part of so called "mass culture".
I understand where your accusation of hypocrisy comes from but for me it is important to re-establish a much more important and general concept: there is no need for a reason to demand privacy nor is it up to everyone to demonstrate that they need it; privacy is a human right and it can only be debated whether there is a violation of this right or not on a case-by-case basis.
@post Does "keeping the keys of your flat on the outside of your door" represent a loss of sovereignty over one's body? Honestly, there's too much politics in this subject. But from a practical point of view, there is also a lot of hypocrisy among the masses.