I thought it was pretty well established. The author wasn't saying that people who value individualism don't value privacy, rather that the pursuit of individual over community values caused an erosion of privacy (regardless of anyone's intentions).
The argument was that getting rid of the informal, localized social norm enforcement mechanisms (your nosy neighbors, a meddlesome priest, etc) that used to prevent people from fully expressing their individuality created a vaccuum that was filled by surveillance.
Your nosy neighbor used to judge you for things we don't think ought to be judged anymore, but they also noticed if you were drinking too much or stopped going to work because your mental health was declining. Since society still needs to work and not drive drunk, surveillance by states and large corporations has stepped in to fill the gap.
So, according to the author, the individualistic ethos brought us to the point where some machine will silently judge me for this post.
The argument was that getting rid of the informal, localized social norm enforcement mechanisms (your nosy neighbors, a meddlesome priest, etc) that used to prevent people from fully expressing their individuality created a vaccuum that was filled by surveillance.
Your nosy neighbor used to judge you for things we don't think ought to be judged anymore, but they also noticed if you were drinking too much or stopped going to work because your mental health was declining. Since society still needs to work and not drive drunk, surveillance by states and large corporations has stepped in to fill the gap.
So, according to the author, the individualistic ethos brought us to the point where some machine will silently judge me for this post.