Didn't headline just state the fact objectively, and any negative implication comes from the mind of the reader? If not, how could the headline be less editorialized (in order to reduce the negative implication)?
2. It says OpenAI "used" workers which has a negative connotation.
3. It is factually incorrect: OpenAI paid a vendor $12.50 per hour. It's unclear if they knew how much the actual workers were paid.
4. It used a negative framing implying ChatGPT is toxic.
So something like
"OpenAI vendor paid Kenyan workers above median wage to make ChatGPT more safe"
"Kenyan workers helped make OpenAI's ChatGPT less toxic"
"OpenAI paid Kenyan workers minimum wage to work on ChatGPT"
Many different things are objectively true, but of course they mention the pay, because they know that to most of their "Western" readers it sounds outrageous.
Regardless, I should have included the phrase "depictions of" or similar.
If they're not properly novel then it depends on what the source images were, I guess? But it's not like you'd need to train it on anything obscene for it to figure out how to combine bad things with nudity.