My take is that the message is personal from the point of view of the "sender", rather than towards the recipient, if that makes sense.
As @apm mentioned, many of us are increasingly turned-off receiving "personalized" messaging that invariably comes across as false, insincere, and inauthentic. As consumers, not only are we collectively getting more savvy with martech, but we're getting better at sniffing-out the BS merchants. No-one's impressed receiving a personally-addressed email any more.
What (still) impresses is content. It's brands talking as though they actually give a stuff about the people they're trying to reach. There isn't a martech stack anywhere at any price that addresses that. Too many so-called marketers are hiding behind tech rather than doing their job.
I contend the reason much of this stuff fails to move the needle is the messaging content is still the same old corporate crud, albeit updated thanks to tech with with a few user-specific details. In my book that's individualization rather than personalization.
I'm not saying that segmented messaging isn't relevant, in many cases it can be extremely useful. But if the underlying messages, segmented or otherwise, are still coming from a committee-decided, overly-edited, 'upset no-one' position that effectively strips-out the humanity, fewer and fewer people are likely to take any notice.