The context in which we see an image makes a significant difference to how we respond to the image. When we present an image for discussion we must remember that we have removed it from its original context. The original context is therefore an important frame of reference that should be recorded in your background work or research.
Is the writer trying to say "You should check out if a work is genuine or fake by verifying where it's from?" or "Depening on the origin of a work, the appreciation of the work can vary."
It's not a matter of whether something is genuine or a fake. It concerns the way our understanding and appreciation of an artwork can vary depending on the surrounding context. We may respond differently to a painting in a gallery than we would to that same painting if we saw it in someone's house. How much of the awe that is inspired by the Mona Lisa is prompted by the grand surroundings of the Louvre and the company of so many other venerated works?
And so, to more fully understand a painting (for example) from a past era we should not only study it in its current context (eg The Louvre), but also consider the role the work played in the original owner's life and how and where the painting was first displayed. These things are part of its original frame of reference.
not a teacher