TIME Magazine Response

gabyanahi012605 — 2025-09-05 00:21:59 UTC

The purpose of the article is to be informative and investigative, it's not necessarily an argument but gives information on the subject. I read it as a consumer who uses ChatGPT as a tool and I realized that the company Sama was taking advantage of their workers while OpenAI was was offering so much more. I mean so much more as in the wages they were offered as well as the psychological help that they needed while fulfilling their jobs. The evidence in the text were the interviews that the writer of the article was conducting, it was effective in the sense that it was giving us information little by little throughout to ensure that us as consumers of ChatGPT were aware of the efforts and affects it took to give us the platform we have now. I wouldn't necessarily say that it made ChatGPT less toxic, yes it did help with controlling the amount of explicit and unethical content that it was spewing. The work was harmful content had a negative impact on the workers who were sorting out and they were not getting paid enough to be doing that kind of work. In my opinion they should've been compensated more and been offered those resources more often instead of being deprived of the opportunity.

My Reading Journal by bella salazar

TIME Magazine Response