Considering fact-checking options

I’m thinking about the user's recent headline post. I should definitely ask if they want me to verify if it's true or provide some context. As of my last update in October 2024, there isn’t a FIFA Peace Award, and Trump hasn’t received an honor from FIFA, so it seems likely to be false or satire. If it's okay with the user, I can offer to fact-check it using sources.Providing FIFA context

I need to offer some context regarding FIFA awards and share reasons to be skeptical. It’s important to mention controversies surrounding Infantino too. I can check reliable sources to ensure accuracy. I must avoid asserting unverified claims beyond my cutoff and not invent details. I should keep the final answer concise, asking a clarifying question while providing helpful preliminary information. Should I check if the user wants me to verify the news, provide context, or assist with rewriting?

你想让我核查这条消息的真假，还是要做背景解读/写成稿件？

• 截至我最新掌握（2024-10），FIFA并未对外设立名为“FIFA和平奖”的官方奖项；常见的是“FIFA Fair Play（公平竞赛奖）”“The Best FIFA Football Awards”等，也未见特朗普获FIFA官方奖项的权威报道。
• 这类标题很可能是讹传、讽刺内容或“张冠李戴”。因凡蒂诺确有多次引发争议的言论与站位，但与“给特朗普颁奖/和平奖”并无公开可信记录可对应。
• 需要的话，我可以现在帮你快速核验：查FIFA官网新闻室、路透/AP/BBC/ESPN等主流媒体，以及最初传播源（发布时间、是否二次编造、视频/图片溯源）。

要我做哪种：1) 事实核查并给出处；2) 背景与传播链分析；3) 帮你改写成评论/短评稿？