I think people might be missing the finer details of this story. This is an example of the system working the way it is supposed to. They are getting a warrant and asking for very narrowly scoped information. If you take your argument to the logical extreme then businesses shouldn't have security cameras either. No crime would ever be solved.

There can be hundreds of people in any venue. There can be more than ten thousands in a skyscraper.

Everyone in an "area" is not necessarily a narrow scope.

That is why it is reviewed by a judge. No one is suggesting there is a one size fits all test. If you look at the location of the first example given in the article though it is a suburban area and only asks for records within 150 Meters for two different 1 hours period when the suspect is known to have been in the area based off video footage of the scene.