As opposed to editing, giving feedback on an article is often a much easier and quicker task. It is often combined with editing, but feedback also often comes from other sources - especially in companies where a piece of writing might be interesting to mutiple teams or departments.
Feedback is superficialy simple and is in fact hard to get write both from a quantity and quality perspective. With too much feedback from too many people, the final product will be bland and contain only things that were not at all objectionable to a wide variety of people. This might sound like a good thing, but in fact interesting writing is almost always controversial.
Further, writing should be put in public as soon as possible after being written. Long feedback rounds from multiple people reduces velocity.
How many people should review an article?