Amazon’s podcasting business has transformed over the past six months, according to The New York Times.

Back in August 2025, the company reportedly eliminated more than 100 jobs from its podcast studio Wondery. At the time, Amazon insisted it was not shutting Wondery down, and that appears to be technically true — it still uses the Wondery brand.

But the NYT said Amazon “took a sledgehammer” to the studio. Audio-only podcasts now operate under Audible, while a new department called Creator Services works with on-camera celebrities like Dax Shepard, Keke Palmer, and Jason and Travis Kelce.

For example, the company said it’s creating an “expanding universe” around the Kelce brothers’ “New Heights,” with monetization plans that go far beyond standard podcast ads. There’s a new section on Amazon called Kelce Clubhouse, where fans can buy “New Heights” merchandise, watch the documentary “Kelce,” and purchase recommended products for a football-watching party.

In the words of Creator Services general manager Matt Sandler, Amazon is trying to “infuse both the content and the commerce together.”

Of course, other online creators are also betting on commerce. But according to the NYT, Amazon is the only one that “dismembered a company” to get here.

Theo Baker is graduating from Stanford this spring with something most seniors don’t have: a book deal, a George Polk Award that he received for his investigative reporting as a student journalist, and a front-row account of one of the most romanticized institutions in the world.

His forthcoming “How to Rule the World: An Education in Power at Stanford University” was excerpted Friday in The Atlantic and based on that alone, I can’t wait to see the rest. The only question worth asking is the same one Baker might be too close to answer: Can a book like this actually change anything? Or does the spotlight, as it always seems to, send more students racing to the place?

The parallel that keeps coming to my mind is “The Social Network.” Aaron Sorkin wrote a film that was an indictment in many ways of the particular sociopathy that Silicon Valley tends to reward. What it seemingly did was make a generation of young people want to be Mark Zuckerberg. The cautionary tale became a recruitment video. The story of the guy who — in the movie, at least — steamrolled his best friend on his way to billions didn’t discourage ambition; it further glamorized it.

Judging by the excerpt, Baker’s portrait of Stanford is far more granular. He talks with hundreds of people to roundly describe the “Stanford inside Stanford.” “You sort of join it freshman year or you don’t,” one student tells Baker. It’s an invite-only world where venture capitalists wine and dine 18-year-olds, where “pre-idea funding” worth hundreds of thousands of dollars gets handed to students before they’ve had an original concept, and where the boundary between mentorship and predation is nearly impossible to discern. (The shame of chasing teenage founders, if it ever existed, is gone; not chasing them is no longer an option for most VCs.) Steve Blank, who teaches the school’s legendary startup course, tells Baker that “Stanford is an incubator with dorms,” which is not meant as a compliment.

What’s new isn’t that this pressure exists but that it has been fully internalized. There was a time, maybe 10, maybe 15 years ago, when Stanford students felt the weight of Silicon Valley expectation pressing down on them from outside. Now, many of them arrive on campus already expecting, as a matter of course, to launch a startup, to raise money, to become rich.

I think about a friend — I’ll call him D — who dropped out of Stanford a few years ago, partway through his first two years, to launch a startup. He was barely past his teens. The words “I’m thinking of taking a leave of absence” had just escaped his mouth before the university, by his own account, gave him its cheerful blessing to dive full bore into the startup. Stanford doesn’t fight this anymore, if it ever did. Departures like his are an expected outcome.

D is now in his mid-twenties. His company has raised what would register in any normal context as an astonishing amount of money. He almost certainly knows more about cap tables, venture dynamics, and product-market fit than most people learn in a decade of conventional careers. By every metric the Valley uses, he’s a success story. But he also doesn’t see his family (no time), has barely dated (no time), and the company, which keeps growing, doesn’t seem inclined to provide him with that kind of balance anytime soon. He is already, in some meaningful sense, behind on his own life.

This is the part that Baker’s excerpt hints at without fully landing on, maybe because he’s still inside it himself. The costs of this system aren’t just distributed in the form of fraud — though Baker is direct about this, describing it as pervasive and largely consequence-free. The costs are also more personal: the relationships not formed, the ordinary milestones of early adulthood traded away in exchange for a billion-dollar vision that, statistically, almost certainly won’t materialize. Blank tells Baker, “100% of entrepreneurs think they’re visionaries. The data say 99% aren’t.”

What happens to the 99% at age 30? At age 40? These aren’t questions Silicon Valley is set up to answer, and they’re certainly not questions Stanford is about to start asking.

Baker also surfaces something that Sam Altman articulates best. Altman — OpenAI CEO, former Y Combinator head, precisely the kind of person these students aspire to become — tells Baker that the VC dinner circuit has become an “anti-signal” to the people who actually know what talent looks like. The students doing the rounds, performing founder-ness for rooms full of investors, tend not to be the real builders. The real builders, presumably, are somewhere else, building things. The performance of ambition and the thing itself are increasingly hard to tell apart, and the system that was ostensibly designed to find genius has gotten very good at finding people who are good at seeming like geniuses.

“How to Rule the World” sounds like exactly the right book for this moment in time. But there’s a certain irony in the strong likelihood that this critically minded book about Stanford’s relationship to power and money will be celebrated by the same class of people it critiques, and — if it does well (it has already been optioned for a movie) — used as further evidence that Stanford produces not just founders and fraudsters but important writers and journalists, too.

Truecaller is one of the world’s most widely used caller identification platforms, with more than 500 million users. Now it’s entering a more challenging phase as growth slows in its largest market and competition intensifies across telecom networks and smartphone platforms.

Much of Truecaller’s growth has been driven by India, which accounts for over 350 million users, or about 70% of its global base. The volume of spam and unwanted calls has turned the app from a simple caller ID service into a more embedded layer of everyday communication.

That position is now shaping its next phase. The company has introduced features such as AI Assistant and Family Protection to drive monetization, alongside tools like Community Suggestions to stay relevant as competition intensifies. This comes as telecom-led solutions such as Calling Name Presentation (CNAP), dedicated number series for verified business calls, and AI-based spam protection gain traction in India. Meanwhile, smartphone makers including Apple and Google continue to build caller identification and spam-blocking capabilities into their operating systems.

As competition increases, Truecaller’s growth is starting to slow. Data shared with TechCrunch from Sensor Tower shows downloads from India fell 16% year-over-year in 2025, while global downloads declined 5%, marking a reversal after several years of growth. Separate data from Appfigures shows downloads peaked at 175 million in 2021, dropped sharply in 2022, and have since hovered around 120 million annually.

India remains Truecaller’s largest market, but its share of downloads has declined from over 70% at its peak to the mid-50s in recent years, pointing to a gradual shift in new user growth toward other markets.

Truecaller’s shift in growth dynamics is being closely watched by investors. The company’s shares have fallen about 78% since its 2021 IPO and are down around 37% so far this year, underscoring investor concerns about its growth outlook and business model. Chief Executive Officer Rishit Jhunjhunwala told TechCrunch that one of the key questions from investors has been around the impact of CNAP in India. He also acknowledged recent headwinds in parts of the business, without elaborating further.

CNAP, an initiative pushed by India’s telecom regulator and one being implemented by telecom operators, displays caller names based on KYC records at the network level without requiring third-party apps. This overlaps with part of Truecaller’s core offering, but is more limited in scope.

Truecaller’s Jhunjhunwala said the company does not see CNAP as a disruption but as validation of the problem.

“Truecaller operates as a global platform with a much richer and dynamic intelligence layer — spanning spam detection, fraud prevention, business identity, and user context across calls and messages,” he said. “This allows us to go significantly beyond basic caller ID.”

Bharath Nagaraj, director of equity research at Cantor Fitzgerald, said CNAP could slow user growth but is unlikely to materially disrupt Truecaller’s core business in the near term. Instead, he pointed to pressure in the company’s advertising segment — driven in part by changes from Google — as the more immediate challenge.

“If you look at the earnings for the company, 65%-70% of it now comes from ad revenue. And that impacted recently,” Nagaraj told TechCrunch.

In its last earnings call (PDF), Truecaller said that it lost roughly one-third of ad traffic from its largest partner in August 2025 — a partner analysts on the call identified as Google. Jhunjhunwala attributed the drop to an unresolved “algorithm issue,” while CFO Odd Bolin said the partner still accounts for more than a third of total revenue. The company is now adding new partners and building its own ad exchange to reduce dependence on any single platform.

But even moving to an in-house ad exchange may not fully address the challenge. Advertising remains highly competitive, with brands able to spend across multiple digital platforms, said Nagaraj. “You can show your ads on Truecaller, but you can also show them on Facebook,” he said.

In-app revenue continues to grow

The pressure on advertising comes even as other parts of Truecaller’s business are on a different trajectory. Data from Appfigures shows that while downloads have plateaued in recent years, gross in-app revenue has risen sharply — from $600,000 in 2017 to $39.3 million in 2025. It has already reached $13.4 million this year as of April 20.

Monthly revenue generated by in-app purchases on Truecaller is now consistently above $2 million and still climbing, per Appfigures.

Truecaller’s presence on iOS has also grown from less than 5% of its total downloads in 2020-2021 to around 11-12% in recent years, per Appfigures, highlighting a shift toward higher-value markets. The company has stepped up efforts on Apple’s platform, including launching real-time caller ID for iPhone in early 2025 and rolling out feature updates to improve parity with its Android app.

Nonetheless, Apple recently expanded its call-screening capabilities, which could reduce the need for third-party apps among iPhone users.

Another key pillar of Truecaller’s monetization strategy is its enterprise offering, Truecaller for Business, which enables companies to verify their identities and communicate with customers via calls and messaging. The segment has been growing steadily, with revenue rising 39% in constant currency in 2025. Truecaller’s Jhunjhunwala said the company is expanding the platform globally by opening its chat services to partners and offering tools such as verified business caller ID to help enterprises verify identity and reach customers.

Alongside its enterprise push, Truecaller has also been expanding its consumer subscription business, which has over 4 million paid subscribers globally, as more users opt for features such as advanced spam protection, AI-based call screening, and an ad-free experience.

In the past, Truecaller has been criticized over how it builds and maintains its vast database of phone identities. An investigation by The Caravan raised questions about consent and data collection practices, particularly in India, where data protection laws have so far been less stringent. Truecaller has denied wrongdoing and maintains that it complies with applicable regulations, but the debate underlines the broader challenge of balancing utility, scale, and user privacy.

Despite all these challenges, Truecaller sees significant room for growth. The company is focused on addressing the rising complexity of communication, Jhunjhunwala said, as spam and scam calls become more sophisticated with advances in AI. Similarly, it plans to expand across all three revenue streams — advertising, enterprise services, and premium subscriptions — as it looks to sustain growth across markets. Whether that will be enough, however, may depend on how quickly it can adapt as caller identification shifts from stand-alone apps to the network, and to the phone itself.