Which action is not considered a government intrusion?

The concept of government intrusion generally revolves around how and where the government conducts surveillance or gathers information, particularly concerning individual privacy rights. Surveillance of a public business area is not considered a government intrusion because these areas are open to the public, and individuals in these spaces typically do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Monitoring of personal communications could indeed be regarded as a government intrusion, especially when it involves private conversations or messages, which individuals expect to keep confidential.

Aerial drone surveillance over private property also raises privacy concerns since it can capture images or data from areas where individuals reasonably expect privacy. Similarly, entry into an abandoned area, depending on specific laws and the context, typically does not implicate privacy rights as there is no longer an expectation of privacy once an area is considered truly abandoned.

In this context, monitoring of personal communications stands out as an action that is commonly viewed as a clear violation of individual privacy rights and therefore would be classified as a government intrusion, rather than the other options which either do not involve reasonable expectations of privacy or pertain to areas abandoned or open to public view.