It is not. The difference is choice. Mass surveillance does not offer you a choice about participating, or ties that choice to some everyday activity. Putting an Echo in your home is a choice.
Choice can be a very weak consolation. Just like how not driving isn't really a viable choice in many regions (although nobody is technically being forced to drive), if choice makes surveillance acceptable, that choice could easily be eroded to the point of being merely a theoretical option. "You want to live without surveillance? Your choice, because we respect that choice so much we have set up special surveillance free zones in Pennsylvania"