I think he's referring to the game of telephone that happens between (in your stated scenario) VP > 3rd-line manager > 2nd-line manager > business person > programmer.
The hierarchy of management and the distance between "decision-makers" and "do-ers" is the bureaucracy that's being referred to.
The fact that the decision-makers and the do-ers don't have a direct line of communication makes any sort of arbitration difficult.
This, specifically, makes life more difficult for the programmer because of the balance of power - the VP can always fire a programmer but the reverse is not true. So a programmer simply has to do what he/she's told and is typically unable to even argue his/her case to the decision-maker (they can complain to the middle manager, but the middle manager has very little incentive to escalate the complaints).
At least, this is how I read initial statement.
So I don't think the initial statement was a criticism of yourself or the article, but rather the typical business case where decision-makers and do-ers do not have direct communication and the power is balanced almost entirely in the hands of the decision-maker.