Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although I dont disagree with your point I took the phrase to refer to e.g. political dissidents and the like.
Fair. Whatever case you want to call it, the point is that privacy shouldn't have to be a conditional, special-case thing (a "specific" "concern" or "need").
I mean, the mentality I'm seeing on HN and Reddit and other sites nowadays is "How DARE $company tie my activities using their service to the IP address I accessed it from!"
It always seemed like common sense to me that any data I give a company (whether implicitly or explicitly) would be combined and reused and remixed in almost any way possible.
Google is welcome to my web activity, as far as I'm concerned, that's my payment for some really awesome web services that don't really have an equal anywhere else, especially wrt. integration.
But then again, I'm not a political dissident and I don't really have anything to hide during an average day on the internet. (And if/when I do have something to hide, I take steps to anonymize myself)
There most certainly is something as a need for a certain degree of privacy, but please do not confuse "need" for "justification". A soccer mom's average activities might not need privacy, but any justification she has is none of anyone's damn business but hers. If she wants to keep everything she does private, fine.
Someone who has a need for privacy would be the usual, political dissidents, unpopular opinions, etc.