That's a very naive view. At the customer size of Twitter, it's more like the old adage. If you owe the bank $1MM it's your problem, but if you own the bank $100MM it's their problem.
Cutting service is the very last cudgel to come out for large contracts. And only when counterparty's insolvency is looming. Which may or may not be the case for Twitter.
If Amazon concluded Twitter's insolvency was near it would certainly negotiate on the contract. Before cutting service. Which is why it's interesting to watch Amazon's reaction here.
But I think what you’re saying seems more likely