Because their income comes from advertising. Because the economy sucks in general, companies in all industries are being more careful with where they spend their marketing budget.

You can see this reflected in the revenue of other advertising companies as well such as google and meta.

Amazon (like every other big company) has raised billions with bonds that they will eventually need to refinance at higher rates.

If they laid off 400 employees, it’s probably because they could afford to (nice way of saying: they were not necessary to keep the business functioning), likely a bet on innovation. As the economy struggles and the prospects of such innovation happening seem far, it makes sense that even a big company like Amazon may choose to cut their losses.

Amazon needs to provide attractive returns to shareholders just like a unicorn. If you $AMZN is not up 5% YoY, then sell it and park it in a 6 month T-bill or I series bond. And as holder of $AMZN, I can tell you that they are definitely not up 5% YoY, let alone the 15% that they generally try to get to.

The owner of Amazon was the prime beneficiary of VC funding to tech companies, because oftentimes a large chunk of that went for AWS. In that gold rush, Amazon was the one selling shovels.

The gold rush is now over, for a while at least, so Amazon is probably seeing a lot of their big AWS customers cutting back, or in some cases disappearing. Essentially, AWS is in the same position as SVBank. If your money comes from lots of tech startups that don't want to have their own infrastructure, and didn't used to need to worry about cutting costs, but now they do, then you can see big "outflows" (except unlike SVB it's more decreasing revenue).

The users that use and pay Twitch do? (Not VC but capital in general)

Their source of revenue (i.e. advertisers) are often startups and DTC brands that were kept alive by VC money.

Bonds are essentially the "free" rate of return. Assuming you trust the government, there's no reason to earn anything less. That means that everything needs to return something above the bond rate. That goes for debt too, why would you write a riskier loan to someone at a lower rate than the government?

LPs looking to put their money somewhere (or many somewheres) will reconsider as rates change. It might not be "vc or bond" but it will cause every part of the financial system to re-calibrate. Maybe a rich person takes out debt against their assets to invest in a VC fund in 2020, but now that the rates rose and stock values fell, the interest rate on that (or comparable) debt is too expensive. For example, Elon's loans for twitter range from 6% to 11%, and would likely be higher if written today.

TLDR Interest rates don't need to compare 1:1 to a VC fund's returns to have an affect on the decision by LPs to invest in it.