Job: @beauty_by_ina_heinrich

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic praise (short positive comment)", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive feedback / social proof; signals appreciation and engagement but provides no substantive content — could be genuine praise or low-effort/bot engagement to boost visible metrics" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: a short German-language praise (“Sehr informativ” — “Very informative”). This is a neutral-to-positive, low-effort comment that increases visible engagement but gives no specific endorsement or detail about the product/service. With a single brief comment it is not possible to robustly determine authenticity: the comment could be organic (a real follower reacting to informational content) or a generic automated/paid comment intended to inflate perceived engagement. Given limited data, there is mild suspicion of fakeness because short generic compliments are commonly used in bots/engagement pods, but there is insufficient evidence to confidently label it fake. For an advertising decision, these comments provide minimal persuasive value. Recommend collecting more data before purchase: total comments distribution, commenter profiles (follower counts, account age, activity), comment timestamps and repetition patterns, content depth (questions, specific mentions), like-to-comment ratio, and replies from the influencer. If many comments are similarly short/generic or commenters are low-quality accounts, reduce confidence in ROI; if comments are diverse, substantive, and from credible accounts, increase confidence in buying ads or partnerships." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_like", "count": 1, "purpose": "Low-effort positive engagement (expresses liking/support); does not convey interest in product or provide qualitative feedback." } ], "interpretation": "The only comment is a single heart emoji. This is a very low-information interaction: it signals a positive reaction but gives no context about the commenter (intent, purchase interest, authenticity). Single-emoji comments are common from both genuine followers and bot/comment-farm activity, so there is moderate risk of fakeness but low confidence given the minimal sample. For advertising-feasibility decisions this comment is weak evidence — it does not demonstrate purchasing intent, audience relevance, or conversational engagement. Recommended next steps before buying ads: inspect the commenter account(s) (age, follower ratio, posting history), review a larger sample of recent comments across multiple posts for varied, substantive comments, check like-to-comment ratios and timing patterns (sudden bursts), and run follower authenticity tools. With only this comment, I would not consider the post's comments a reliable indicator of a real, engaged audience." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Affirmation/social proof — short praise that increases visible engagement; could be genuine follower appreciation or low-effort automated/bot comment" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍' is a short, generic positive compliment with emoji. Positive signals: it uses the local language (German) and expresses clear appreciation of the creator's content. Concerning signals: it's short, non-specific to post content and contains repeated emoji — typical features of low-effort comments or engagement-bot output. With only one comment provided, assessment is highly uncertain. The moderate fakeness score (45) reflects that the comment could be either genuine follower praise or a generic/bot-style comment; confidence is low (30). For advertising feasibility the overall score (55) is cautiously positive because the comment contributes to visible engagement, but the lack of detailed, content-specific comments and the single-sample size limit evidence of an engaged, authentic audience. Recommend reviewing a larger sample of recent comments for specificity, variety, timing, and commenter profile checks (follower-to-poster interaction history, account age, follower quality) before deciding on ad spend." }

Text: Was ist das von einer Lippenstift? Der ist ja wunderschön und ich mag solche Farbe. Vielen Dank Voraus.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry + Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask what product/brand the lipstick is, express positive sentiment about color, and prompt a response from the influencer (engagement / potential purchase interest)." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment is a direct product inquiry combined with praise: the commenter asks what lipstick it is, compliments the color, and thanks in advance. The content is specific and action-oriented (potential purchase intent), which is valuable for advertisers. The German contains non-native grammar ("Was ist das von einer Lippenstift?"), which could indicate either a non-native human user or an imperfect automated/translated message; however the specificity and request for product info make it more likely genuine than a generic bot praise. Confidence is limited by sample size—one comment gives a weak signal about overall audience quality. Recommendation: before buying ad space, review more comments across multiple posts, inspect the commenter profile(s) for authenticity (account age, posts, followers, behavior), check for repeated/similar comments across posts, and compare comment-to-like ratios. Current signal: positive but insufficient alone to guarantee high-quality, purchase-ready audience." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express aesthetic praise (compliment about color/appearance); signals positive engagement but contains little substance—commonly posted by real followers and also frequently produced by bots or engagement pods." } ], "interpretation": "Single short comment 'Schöne Farbe 😍' is a simple positive reaction. Its brevity, lack of specificity (no reference to product, no question, no purchase intent) makes it low-information: consistent with genuine follower appreciation but also matches patterns used by automated accounts or engagement pods. Given only one comment, authenticity assessment is uncertain—there is insufficient evidence to conclude high or low authenticity. For advertising feasibility this single comment is weak evidence of meaningful audience interest. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, inspect commenter profiles for originality and follower counts, check timing patterns (burst commenting), comment-to-like ratios, and presence of specific product-related conversations or questions. Based on the current single-comment sample, treat engagement as tentative and run deeper due diligence before purchase." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/thank-you", "count": 1, "purpose": "expresses gratitude and praise for content; signals audience appreciation and basic engagement" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️') is a straightforward, language-native thank-you with an emoji and minimal generic phrasing. That pattern is most consistent with a genuine follower expressing appreciation rather than a clearly fake/bot comment. However, the sample size is one comment, so the assessment has low confidence: a single positive comment does not demonstrate broad, authentic engagement or audience diversity. To make an informed advertising-feasibility decision, examine more comments (quantity, timing, variation), commenter account details (age, followers, activity), likes on the post, and whether similar comments repeat across posts (a sign of bots/generic engagement). Based on this single comment, the fakeness risk appears low but the overall suitability for advertising remains only moderate-to-low because of insufficient data." }

Text: Deine manicure ist so schön. Erzähl uns mal bitte auch etwas über deine Handpflege. Du hast wunderschöne Hände.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment + Content request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the influencer's manicure/hands and request advice or a post about hand care — signals positive sentiment and intent to engage or receive more content." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a specific, topical compliment: it references the manicure and explicitly asks for hand-care details. That specificity lowers the likelihood it is a generic bot/comment-farm message; it appears to be authentic engagement from a follower interested in related content. However, this is only one data point — you cannot reliably judge overall audience quality or bot/paid comment prevalence from a single comment. For ad-buy decisions, the comment is a positive signal (relevant interest and potential for conversion in beauty/self-care categories) but insufficient alone. Recommended next steps: review a larger sample of recent comments for diversity (unique phrasing, languages, emoji use), timing patterns (bursts immediately after posting), commenter profiles (account age, follower/following ratio, activity), overall engagement rate vs. follower count, and presence of repeated templated comments. If those checks show similarly specific and varied engagement, this would support higher confidence in purchasing advertising with the influencer." }

Text: Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which product (eyesahdow) was used — intent to learn product details, possible purchase interest" }, { "type": "Compliment / positive sentiment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the color/appearance to express approval and engage the creator" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a genuine-looking, specific question combined with a compliment (\"Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍\"). This indicates real user interest in the makeup product and willingness to engage — a positive signal for advertisers in cosmetics: the audience may ask about or seek to buy recommended items. Fakeness is assessed low because the language is natural, specific, and shows intent rather than generic praise or emoji-only content. However, this assessment is limited by the sample size (only one comment). For a reliable influencer advertising decision, analyze a larger set of comments, commenter account quality (real profiles, follower counts, activity), comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and occurrence of repeated generic comments. Based on this single comment, the post shows promising organic interest (overall score 65) but keep confidence moderate due to insufficient data." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine question / engaged feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Follower asks whether the influencer has overlined/over-applied lipstick — a product/appearance inquiry that signals curiosity or mild critique and indicates real engagement rather than promotion or spam." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a natural-language, context-specific question in German ('Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?'), which looks authentic: it's neither generic praise nor clearly promotional, contains no bot-like patterns (repeated emojis, links, tags), and points to specific visual detail in the post. That pattern suggests a real follower asking about makeup technique or product authenticity. However, this is only one comment; conclusions about the overall comment authenticity and community quality are low-confidence. For advertising-feasibility decisions you need more data (total number of comments, like-to-follower ratio, comment variety, timestamps, reply behavior, repeated phrases across posts, follower growth and audience demographics). If most comments look like this—specific, conversational—signal for genuine engagement is strong. If instead most comments are generic ('Nice', many emojis) or duplicated, the account would be higher-risk for fake engagement." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only (heart)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses positive sentiment/acknowledgement. Low-information engagement that can serve to boost visible engagement; may come from a genuine follower, a casual viewer, or an automated/low-effort account." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a lone heart emoji, which signals positive reaction but provides no substantive feedback or audience detail. Emoji-only comments are common from real followers but are also frequently produced by low-effort accounts or engagement farms; with only this one data point authenticity is ambiguous. For influencer ad-buy decisions this comment alone is insufficient evidence of an engaged, authentic audience. Recommend obtaining a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), comment timing patterns, and engagement rates (likes per post, comment-to-follower ratio) before trusting audience quality. Based on this single emoji comment, treat engagement as weak and noisy—not a reliable indicator of ad effectiveness." }

Text: Ich hab nicht Mal genug Lippe um sie voller zu schminken 😂 aber bei dir schaut alles super aus 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Genuine compliment / relatable self-deprecation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the influencer's appearance, build rapport through a self-referential, humorous remark and emotional alignment (emojis reinforce positive sentiment)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Ich hab nicht Mal genug Lippe um sie voller zu schminken 😂 aber bei dir schaut alles super aus 😍\" reads as organic: it contains a personal, self-comparative line, natural grammar, and context-specific emojis, rather than generic bot phrasing or promotional language. That indicates real follower engagement and positive sentiment toward the influencer. However, this is only one comment — insufficient to draw strong conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this comment is a small positive signal, but you should examine broader metrics (comment volume and diversity, commenter profiles, repetition of similar phrases, comment timing patterns, like-to-follower ratio, and audience demographics) before buying advertising. Recommendations: sample 50–200 recent comments, check unique commenter ratio and profile quality, and look for repeated templates/phrases or sudden spikes in engagement to better estimate fake activity." }

Text: Ich finde das sieht so komisch aus, aus der Nähe, wenn man etwas weiter außen "malt". Oder mache ich etwas falsch?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "constructive critique / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Give feedback about technique and ask for clarification/help; indicates genuine interest and engagement from a follower rather than promotion or bot activity." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is written naturally in German, is specific to the content (mentions painting technique and close-up appearance), and reads like genuine engagement rather than a generic or promotional message. That makes it unlikely to be fake (hence a low fakeness score). However, because this is only one comment, the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions about the overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility: this type of comment is positive (shows engaged, content-aware followers), but the low comment volume limits commercial confidence. Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: review a larger sample of recent comments, check commenter profiles for real accounts/recurring commenters, compute comment-to-like ratio and overall engagement rate, and look for reply rate from the influencer. If many comments are similar in specificity and tone, the account is more attractive for ads; if most comments are short/generic or from suspicious accounts, treat with caution." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Brief praise/admiration of appearance (short positive remark). Could be genuine engagement from a follower or a generic low-effort/bot comment." } ], "interpretation": "The only comment provided is 'Volle Lippen' (German for 'Full lips'), a short, context-dependent compliment. With a single, single-word comment the signal is very weak. This phrase is natural language and could be a genuine follower compliment, but it is also the type of generic short comment often produced by bots or engagement farms on beauty-related posts. I estimate overall fakeness at 40/100 (leaning slightly toward potentially genuine but with notable risk of automation or low-effort engagement) with moderate confidence (55/100). For influencer advertising feasibility this single comment offers insufficient evidence of a responsive, authentic audience — overall suitability rated 40/100 with low confidence (30/100). Recommended next steps before purchase: analyze the full comment set, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), repetition of identical short comments, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratio, saved/forwarded metrics, and follower authenticity signals to reach a reliable decision." }

Text: Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Praise / Compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Endorsement/support of influencer's advice; expresses agreement and intent to follow tips." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.\") is a short, positive endorsement. It expresses agreement with the influencer's opinion and a promise to follow their advice. Signals that reduce likelihood of being fake: uses specific topical content (narrow lips), not a generic product plug, contains typos/grammatical quirks ('Tip' vs 'Tipp', odd sentence structure) which often indicate a real human rather than a polished bot. Signals that increase suspicion: overenthusiastic phrasing ('werde ... immer folgen') and generic praise without detail or personal anecdote; lack of emojis or profile context; only one comment provided so sample size is minimal. Overall, this single comment appears more likely genuine than fraudulent but the assessment is uncertain due to limited data. For advertising decisions, rely on a broader sample: check many comments for diversity, timestamps (organic spread vs burst), commenter profiles (real accounts, followers, past engagement), like-to-comment ratios, and comment originality. Based on this one comment, I give a cautious mid-level suitability score (45/100) with moderate-low confidence; further comment/profile analysis is required before committing to an ad purchase." }

Text: Ein Business MakeUp für Fotoshooting würde mich interessieren. 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Content request / genuine interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks for a 'business makeup for photoshoot' tutorial/service — expresses interest in specific content or service and signals potential demand for beauty-related products." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided. Its wording is specific (asks for a 'Business MakeUp for photoshoot') and uses an emoji, which suggests a real user expressing interest rather than a generic bot reply. Fakeness likelihood is low. For advertising decisions this is a mildly positive signal: the audience (or at least this commenter) is interested in beauty/makeup content relevant to photoshoots, so beauty, cosmetics, or makeup-service advertisers could find alignment. However, the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions about overall audience quality or engagement patterns. Recommended next steps before purchase: review total comment volume and diversity, engagement rate (likes/comments relative to followers), comment timestamps (to detect bursts), repeat/generic comment patterns across posts, commenter account authenticity, and audience demographics. Based on the single comment alone I rate the post moderately suitable (60/100) but with only medium confidence because more data is needed." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive feedback and basic engagement (signal approval, boosts perceived popularity)" } ], "interpretation": "Имеется только один короткий комментарий — «Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍». Это типичный позитивный, эмоциональный и общепринятый лайк-комментарий (комплимент + эмодзи). По форме и содержанию он выглядит естественно: без маркетинговых ключевых слов, без ссылок и без очевидных шаблонов, что снижает вероятность того, что это явно фейковый/ботовый комментарий. Однако одиночный комментарий не даёт достаточного объёма данных для надёжной оценки аудитории или вовлечённости. Возможные трактовки: 1) действительно живой, органический отклик от подписчика; 2) стандартный «плейсхолдер»-комментарий, который может появляться и в органическом, и в купленном наборе комментариев. Для принятия решения об рекламной покупке требуются дополнительные данные: общее количество комментариев и лайков, повторяемость подобных комментариев, распределение активности по времени, профили комментаторов (реальные аккаунты или подозрительные), и история взаимодействия с инфлюенсером. На основании этого одного комментария рекомендация — считать сигнал позитивным, но крайне ограниченным: нельзя полагаться на него как на доказательство эффективной, подлинной вовлечённости аудитории." }

Text: Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive reaction / Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/approval (emoji + 'Wow') to show interest and provide social proof." }, { "type": "Product inquiry / Purchase intent", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks where the products are available — direct purchase interest and a potential lead for conversions." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as genuine: natural language in German, contextual emoji use, and a direct question about product availability that indicates real purchase interest. It does not show typical bot/fake patterns (generic one-word praise, copy-paste text, unrelated links, or obvious spam). However, this is only one data point — while encouraging for conversion potential, it is insufficient alone to conclude the overall authenticity of the influencer's audience. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts, check commenter profiles for real accounts and follower ratios, calculate engagement rate, and look for repeated/generic comments that indicate inorganic engagement before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short generic compliment / emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive sentiment / superficial engagement — either a genuine quick praise from a follower or a low-effort automated/generic comment intended to boost visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: a short string of applause and heart emojis plus 'sehr schön' (German: 'very beautiful'). This is non-specific positive feedback that signals sentiment but provides no meaningful information about purchase intent, audience relevance, or depth of engagement. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are equally easy for bots or engagement farms to generate, so there is moderate uncertainty about authenticity. Given the extremely limited sample, do not rely on this alone to judge influencer advertising value — review comment volume, diversity, timing, follower profiles, like-to-comment ratios, and repeated patterns before making a buying decision." }

Text: Hallo, könntest du bitte sagen welche Lidschatten Palette du für dieses Make-up benutzt hast sind alles schöne warme Korallentöne. Ich würde gerne die Palette wissen. 🙏🏻 vielen Dank.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 90, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 70, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / genuine follower question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used; expresses interest in the product and possible purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct, specific question in German about the eyeshadow palette used for the look and reads like genuine follower engagement (personal question, polite tone, emoji). There are no obvious markers of bot/spam behavior (generic praise, emoji floods, repeated short phrases, or promotional links). As a signal for advertising feasibility this is positive — it indicates real product interest — but it is only one data point. To form a reliable conclusion about the influencer's audience quality and ad value, review a larger sample of comments (volume, diversity, timing), like-to-follower ratio, recurring commenters, language distribution, and historical response rate to product questions. Based on this single comment, the comment section appears authentic and potentially valuable for product-driven campaigns, but further analysis is recommended before purchase decisions." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative", "count": 1, "purpose": "express dissatisfaction or critique the post (calls out that the post is not 'subtle') — likely genuine user opinion rather than promotional or bot-like content" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, 'Dezent ist anders' (German for 'This isn't subtle'), is a short, negative/critical remark. Its phrasing is organic, context-specific and lacks common bot/spam markers (no emojis, links, repeated phrases, or generic praise), so it appears genuine. However, with only one comment available the sample is far too small to draw firm conclusions about overall comment authenticity, sentiment distribution, or engagement quality. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this isolated negative comment slightly lowers the immediate impression of audience enthusiasm but is insufficient evidence of fake engagement. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of comments, commenter profiles (activity, follower/following ratios), comment timestamps, like-to-comment ratio, and recurring comment patterns to form a reliable assessment." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product_inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which products were used in the post — indicates genuine interest and potential purchase intent from a follower." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: 'Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.' This is a direct product inquiry in German and reads like a genuine follower question rather than a generic bot/spam message. That suggests at least some real engagement and potential purchase intent, which is positive for advertising. However, the sample size is too small to draw firm conclusions about overall comment authenticity or community quality. Recommend collecting more comments (volume, diversity, timing), checking likes-to-comments ratio, follower quality (age, activity), and looking for repeat/generic phrases or suspicious account patterns before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative", "count": 1, "purpose": "express personal dissatisfaction about the influencer's appearance (eyebrows); likely unsolicited viewer feedback meant to criticize or warn others rather than to promote." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: a German-language critical remark about the influencer's eyebrows being set too high. Specific, negative, and language-specific content like this is unlikely to be a scripted or promotional (fake) comment — negative specificity usually indicates a genuine reaction, which is why the fakeness score is low. However, a single comment is an extremely small sample and cannot establish overall audience quality or sentiment. For advertising feasibility: authenticity (presence of candid criticism) is a positive indicator for organic engagement and trustworthiness of the audience, but visible negative comments about appearance could pose brand-fit risks for beauty, fashion, or image-focused campaigns. Recommendation: request a larger sample of recent comments (diversity of sentiment, repeated themes, engagement rates, timing, presence of generic praise or spam) and examine overall follower quality before making an ad purchase decision. If many comments are similar in negativity, treat as a potential reputation risk; if negative comments are rare and outweighed by positive, proceed but consider campaign messaging that avoids triggering the criticized aspect." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Seeks information about product effect (how pores are covered); indicates interest and prompts influencer/product owner to respond." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct, content-specific question in German: \"Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?\" (What are the pores covered with?). It reads as a genuine follower asking for product details rather than a generic compliment, emoji spam, or promotional bot message. That lowers the likelihood of fakery (fakeness score low at 10). However, with only one comment provided, the sample size is too small to draw robust conclusions about the overall authenticity of the account's audience or engagement quality. For advertising purchase decisions this comment is a positive signal (real interest / potential conversion), but you should request a larger comments sample, look at comment timestamps, account follower quality, like-to-comment ratios, and patterns (repeated phrases, foreign-language mismatches, usernames) before finalizing a buy. Recommended next steps: collect 100+ recent comments, check top commenters for repeat patterns, and review follower accounts for real profiles to raise confidence." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Information seeking — user asks what products are shown, indicating curiosity or interest in the post content." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was sind das für Produkte ?' — 'What kind of products are these?') is a neutral, language-specific (German) inquiry that reads as genuine user engagement rather than scripted or promotional content. It contains no typical bot indicators (repetitive praise, emojis-only, referral links) and directly relates to the post content, which supports authenticity. However, this is only one comment; low comment volume limits confidence in overall audience quality and engagement patterns. For advertising feasibility: a genuine question is a positive signal (audience curiosity), but the sample is too small to judge sustained interest, audience demographics, or conversion potential. Recommended next steps before purchase: provide more comments from the post, metrics (likes, reach, follower count and growth, comment-to-follower ratio), comment timestamps, and examples of recurring commenters to assess engagement depth and authenticity more reliably." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (heart)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses positive sentiment/liking; low-effort engagement that signals approval but provides no topical or purchase-intent information. Such comments can be genuine fans, casual followers, or automated/mass-engagement accounts." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (three heart emojis) conveys positive sentiment but has very low informational value for advertiser decision-making. Emoji-only comments are common and ambiguous: they may be authentic quick reactions from real followers or part of low-effort/inorganic engagement (bots or mass-likers). Given the tiny sample size, assessment confidence is low. As a result, this comment alone is not a reliable indicator of an engaged, purchase-ready audience. For an advertising feasibility decision, examine a larger sample of comments and engagement metrics (comment variety and depth, commenter account quality, repetition patterns, followers-to-engagement ratio, timing and velocity of comments) before concluding. Based on this single comment, treat the signal as weakly positive but insufficient — recommend further analysis." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 25, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "express approval/praise of the post (engagement signal)" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment was provided: \"Richtig schön\" (German for \"really/very beautiful\"). This is a generic positive reaction that could be genuine follower engagement but is also the kind of minimal text often produced by bots or low-effort commenters. With no additional metadata (author identity, account age, follower count, timestamp, likes on the comment, or other comments to compare), confidence in any judgment is low. For advertising feasibility this single brief positive comment is insufficient evidence of high-quality, authentic engagement. Recommend reviewing the full comment set, commenter profiles, comment timestamps, like-to-comment ratio, and patterns of similar generic comments across other posts before making a buying decision." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (fire emojis)", "count": 1, "purpose": "express praise/hype and positive reaction; low-effort engagement that can serve to boost visible activity" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is provided: three fire emojis (🔥🔥🔥). Emoji-only comments are common and ambiguous: they can be genuine quick reactions from real followers or low-effort/inorganic engagement (bots, engagement pods, or purchased comments). With only one short comment there is insufficient evidence to reliably judge authenticity. The moderate fakeness score reflects that emoji-only, contextless comments have a non-negligible chance of being inorganic but are also often legitimate. For advertising feasibility this item alone is not persuasive — you need more data (volume and variety of comments, commenter account quality, timing patterns, likes on comments, overall engagement rate vs follower count). Recommended next checks before buying ads: sample a larger set of recent comments, inspect commenter profiles for real activity and followers, check comment timestamps for bursts, and compare post-level engagement metrics to account follower numbers." }

Text: Auch wenn sie botox hätte? Na und? Es geht hier um schminktechnik!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Defensive / Supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defend the subject against implied criticism (about Botox), redirect the conversation to the main topic (makeup technique), express acceptance/minimize negativity." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment appears organic and spontaneously defensive: the commenter dismisses a potential criticism about Botox and refocuses on the content (makeup technique). This indicates at least one engaged follower willing to defend the influencer and keep discussion on-topic. However, with only one comment provided, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall audience authenticity, sentiment distribution, or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility this single supportive remark is a mildly positive signal (engaged, topic-relevant audience), but you should analyze a larger set of comments, like/comment ratios, timing patterns, diversity of commenters, and follower authenticity before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Was für eine Verwandlung - wow! 🤩 Natürlich spielen auch die Frisur und die Kleidung mit rein, aber am Ende siehst du deutlich wacher, frischer und jugendlicher aus.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and social validation — highlights perceived transformation and compliments the subject's refreshed, youthful look; also notes contributing factors (hairstyle, clothing) which adds observational detail and reduces the appearance of a boilerplate/generic comment." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a positive, specific reaction that functions as social proof: it praises the transformation and adds observational detail (hairstyle, clothing) rather than a one-word generic compliment. That specificity slightly reduces the likelihood it's purely automated or copy-paste. For advertising feasibility this is a small positive signal — followers reacting with recognition of a visible change is relevant for beauty/fashion/lifestyle campaigns. However, one comment is insufficient to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. Before making a purchase decision, request more data: full comment sample, timestamps, commenter profiles (real accounts vs. newly created), like-to-follower and comment-to-follower ratios, repetition of phrasing across posts, and overall engagement trends. Based on available evidence: likely genuine but limited sample size means moderate uncertainty." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive praise / emoji-only", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval and encouragement; increase visible engagement and social proof without adding substantive feedback or context." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" is a short, generic positive reaction using emojis. Such comments serve to boost apparent engagement and convey approval, but they contain no substantive information about audience interest, purchase intent, or product-specific feedback. Emoji-heavy, one-line praise can be genuine (a real follower reacting quickly) or low-effort/inorganic (bot farms, engagement pods, or purchased comments); with only one example it's not possible to reliably distinguish. Given this limited sample, the fakeness risk is moderate (estimated 45/100) but the confidence in that estimate is low (30/100). For ad-purchase decisions the evidence is insufficient: a single generic comment is weak signal. I recommend a deeper audit before buying ads or influencer slots — examine comment diversity (meaningful questions, tagged friends), commenter profiles (real accounts, follower counts, history), like-to-comment ratio, comment timestamps, saved/shares metrics, and trends across multiple posts. If most comments are similar generic emoji praise, that suggests low-quality engagement and reduces ad value; if many are detailed and from real accounts, the influencer is more likely to provide worthwhile reach." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short generic praise / emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/positive reaction and to signal engagement to the algorithm (low informational content)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided is a very short, generic positive reaction (“Wow 😍”). This type of comment is common from real followers but is also frequently produced by low-effort bot/spam accounts or engagement pods. With only one comment and no context (no commenter username/profile data, no timestamps, no comment history, no like counts), the signal is weak and ambiguous. I assess the comments as moderately likely to be inauthentic (fakeness score ~60) but with low confidence because the sample is too small. For advertising feasibility: this comment alone does not provide evidence of an engaged, authentic audience — overall suitability for ad purchase is low (score 25). Recommended next steps before any purchase: review a larger sample of recent comments across multiple posts, inspect commenter profiles for real photos/follower counts/activity, check for repeated identical comments, compare comment timing patterns, calculate engagement rate (likes + comments relative to follower count), and ask the influencer for audience metrics (demographics, reach, saves, impressions)." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "user_mention/tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "To draw another user's attention to the post — could be a friendly tag, referral, cross-promotion, or low-effort spam." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"@rukiyevizercimen\". This is a non-substantive user mention. Such comments are ambiguous: they can be genuine (a follower tagging a friend), neutral (alerting someone to see the post), or part of low-quality engagement (spammy or bot-driven mass-tagging). With only one example, there is insufficient evidence to reliably classify the account's overall comment quality or authenticity. The moderate fakeness score reflects that user-mention comments are commonly used both legitimately and by low-effort/bot activity; confidence is low because the sample size is one. For a robust advertising-feasibility decision, analyze a larger comment sample and additional signals: variety and depth of comments, repeat commenters, timing patterns, commenter profiles (age, avatars, follower counts), ratio of followers to engagement, language consistency, and any repeated identical tags across multiple posts. Based on the single comment, the post shows low informational engagement, which slightly reduces its attractiveness for brands seeking meaningful audience interaction, but this assessment is tentative and should not be used alone to make a buying decision." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive/thank-you (emoji-rich)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express gratitude/positive engagement and acknowledgement of the post or creator." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍”) is short, emoji-heavy and reads as a genuine thank-you from a follower. Features supporting authenticity: casual phrasing in natural language (German), use of multiple expressive emojis, and a message that directly addresses the creator. Features that limit confidence: it is brief and generic enough that it could also come from an engagement pod or a low-effort bought comment. Given only one data point, the fakeness likelihood is low-to-moderate (score 20) but confidence is limited. For an advertising-purchase decision, this single comment is insufficient. Recommend gathering more data: volume and timing of comments, diversity of comment content, commenter profile checks (account age, follower counts, posting history), ratios of generic comments (single emojis/one-word replies), likes on comments, and consistency across multiple recent posts. With that broader dataset you can produce a higher-confidence assessment of audience quality and whether the influencer's engagement is organic enough for ad spend." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Agreement/Support (short text)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses concise agreement with the post's message—serves as endorsement/positive feedback and signals basic audience resonance." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr\" is a short, context-relevant German affirmation ('Right ... and less is often more'). It reads as a genuine, human reply: meaningful (not generic praise or emoji-only), grammatically correct, and on-topic. There are no obvious bot/spam markers (repeated phrases, promotional links, irrelevant emojis). However, this is only one data point: you cannot reliably judge overall comment authenticity, engagement depth, or audience quality from a single comment. For advertising-buy decisions, this suggests some real positive sentiment in the audience but provides insufficient evidence of consistent, high-quality engagement. Recommended next steps: collect a larger sample of comments (varied posts and times), examine commenter diversity (unique accounts, follower counts, account age), check comment/like ratios, look for repeated phrasing patterns or comment velocity, and review replies and conversation depth. With current evidence, treat the influencer as a possible but unproven candidate—further verification needed before purchase." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express brief positive reaction / approval; increases visible engagement but provides little substantive feedback. Can come from genuine followers, engagement pods, or automated/bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided (\"👏👏👏👏\") signals a positive reaction but carries very low informational value. Short emoji-only comments are ambiguous: they are commonly posted by real followers as quick praise, but they are also frequently produced by low-effort engagement strategies (bots, engagement pods, or paid comment farms). Given only one comment and no metadata (commenter profile, timestamp, repetition across posts, like counts, follower counts, overall comment distribution), the assessment is necessarily uncertain. The moderately high fakeness score reflects that emoji-only comments are a known indicator of potentially inauthentic engagement, but the confidence is limited by sparse data. For advertising-purchase decisions the available signal is weak — score is low because this single comment does not demonstrate meaningful audience interest, conversation quality, or authentic community. Recommended next steps before buying advertising: collect a larger sample of recent comments across multiple posts; analyze commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity, avatar and bio completeness); check for repeated identical comments across posts; compare engagement rate to follower count; and run automated bot-detection checks. These steps will materially increase confidence in whether the influencer's engagement is authentic and whether ad spend is likely to reach real, interested users." }

Text: Wie gerne ich immer Frauen, die den Kajal so auftragen ansprechen würde. Aber ich Trau mich nicht 🥹 Ich schwöre fürs Abschminken auf die Emulsion von @ohganicals kaum bekannt, aber besser als alles, was ich davor hatte!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "personal anecdote / testimonial", "count": 1, "purpose": "Share a personal experience and endorse a product (emulsion from @ohganicals) as effective for makeup removal." }, { "type": "engagement / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses interest/admiration toward people who wear the eyeliner that way and uses an emoji to convey shyness/affection; intended to build rapport with the post/creator." }, { "type": "brand mention / product plug", "count": 1, "purpose": "Tags a brand account and promotes it as 'better than everything I had before' — could be genuine recommendation or subtle promotion/affiliate mention." } ], "interpretation": "The comment reads as a conversational, first-person reaction: it combines a social/emotional reaction to the post (wanting to approach people who wear kohl that way) with a specific product recommendation tagging @ohganicals for makeup removal. Linguistic cues (emoji, modest phrasing, 'kaum bekannt') and the presence of a concrete anecdote support a likely genuine user testimonial. However, the explicit brand tag introduces ambiguity: it could be an organic mention, a gifted/paid shoutout, or an affiliate-style plug. Given only a single comment for analysis, the sample is too small to generalize about the overall comment authenticity on the post. For a stronger advertising-feasibility judgment, examine: commenter profile (follower count, history of tagging brands), frequency of similar comments, timing patterns, other comments on the post, and like/reply structure. Current assessment: moderately positive signal for authentic engagement and potential product interest, but not definitive proof of organic community support or influencer-driven conversions." }

Text: Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval of the influencer's makeup/appearance; reinforce credibility and provide positive engagement" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short, positive compliment in German ('You are right — with the right makeup a lot can be achieved') with supportive emojis. It functions as endorsement and social proof rather than substantive product experience or detailed inquiry. Likely authentic but not strongly diagnostic: its natural phrasing and emoji use favor genuineness, however generic compliments are commonly posted by both real followers and automated/generic engagement accounts. With only one comment and no metadata (username, account age, posting time, comment patterns), detection confidence is limited. For advertising-feasibility decisions this is a small positive signal (shows follower positivity), but insufficient alone. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent comments for repetition/generic phrasing, check commenter account quality (profile, follower counts, activity), compare comment-to-like ratio, and look for conversational/long-form comments or questions that indicate real audience interest before committing to ad spend." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic praise / short positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Simple positive feedback and lightweight engagement (expresses approval, supports the poster). Often used by genuine followers but also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or paid commenters because it requires minimal effort." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: \"Супер 👍\". This is a single, short, positive reaction in Russian with an emoji. Its information value is low — it signals positive sentiment but not intent, specificity, or meaningful engagement (no questions, no product references, no tagging). Short generic comments are ambiguous: they can be authentic micro-engagement from a real follower, or they can come from bots/engagement pods because they are cheap to produce. Given the single data point, I assign a neutral fakeness estimate (50/100) but with low confidence (30/100) due to insufficient context (no commenter profile data, no timing/volume patterns, no like counts or other comments). For advertising feasibility the evidence here is weak: a solitary generic positive comment does not demonstrate audience quality, purchase intent, or active community dynamics. I give an overall suitability score of 35/100 with low confidence (30/100). Recommended next steps: obtain more comments across multiple posts, commenter usernames and profiles, timestamps, like counts, follower demographics and engagement rate, and look for repeated commenters or conversational threads — these will allow a much more reliable fakeness and suitability assessment." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and social support for the influencer; boosts perceived popularity and positive sentiment." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment ('Инночка, красотка. 🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏') is a brief, personalized compliment using a diminutive name and multiple emojis. That pattern is typical of a genuine follower expressing admiration rather than a clear bot/spam message. Fakeness risk is low but not zero — generic short praise can be faked or left by low-effort accounts. However, with only one comment provided, the sample is too small to draw robust conclusions about the overall authenticity or commercial value of the account's engagement. For ad-buy decisions, this comment alone provides weak evidence of healthy, engaged community: it signals positive sentiment but no depth (no questions, no tagging, no conversation). Recommended next steps: analyze a larger set of recent comments, inspect commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history), check comment-to-like ratio, look for repeated phrases across comments, and assess follower growth patterns before committing to advertising." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji praise (clapping emojis)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/encouragement; generic positive engagement with low informational value; can inflate visible engagement without demonstrating meaningful interest." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is an emoji-only applause (\"👏👏\"). Emoji-only positive reactions are common from genuine followers but are also frequently used by inorganic accounts or low-effort engagement services. With only one comment available, there is insufficient data to draw strong conclusions about authenticity or audience quality. The moderate fakeness score reflects the possibility that this is generic/low-effort engagement rather than a substantive endorsement; the low confidence scores reflect the very small sample size. For an advertising-feasibility decision, this single comment is not a reliable signal — collect a larger, time-stamped sample of comments, examine commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity, profile pictures), look for repeated phrasing or accounts, compare likes vs. comments vs. follower count, and check engagement timing to better assess authenticity and audience relevance." }

Text: Ist es nicht heute?wenn ja,wie komm ich dahin?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine_question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking for event timing and directions — indicates genuine interest/engagement and possible intent to attend." }, { "type": "praise_or_support", "count": 0, "purpose": "Likes, compliments, emojis indicating positive sentiment (none present)." }, { "type": "spam_or_promo", "count": 0, "purpose": "Unrelated promotional content or links (none present)." }, { "type": "bot_like_or_generic", "count": 0, "purpose": "Short generic comments that could be automated (none present)." }, { "type": "question_request_for_more_info", "count": 1, "purpose": "Requests logistical details (time, how to get there) — overlaps with genuine_question but emphasizes informational intent." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment ('Ist es nicht heute? wenn ja, wie komm ich dahin?') is a direct, context-specific question asking whether an event is today and how to get there. It reads as authentic user engagement (low fakeness). It signals potential on-the-ground interest and a real follower or local viewer seeking actionable information. However, a single comment is insufficient to judge the overall comment quality or authenticity of the influencer's audience. For ad-buy decisions, you should inspect: commenter profiles (age, follower count, activity), comment diversity and volume across multiple posts, like-to-comment ratios, temporal patterns (burstiness), and presence of generic or repeated comments. Based on this lone comment the post shows a real engagement signal but is far too small a sample to conclude high-quality, authentic audience broadly." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_reaction / low-effort engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval and boost visible engagement; minimal informational content. Could be a genuine quick reaction from a follower or a generic/bot comment used to inflate engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it contains three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). Emoji-only comments are low-signal: they indicate positive sentiment but provide no topical or audience information. Such comments are common from real followers as quick praise but are also frequently produced by bots or mass-engagement services. Given the lack of contextual data (number of total comments, commenter account details, timing, repetition across posts, like-to-comment ratios, follower quality), authenticity cannot be confidently determined. For advertising feasibility this comment alone is weak evidence of a valuable, engaged audience. Recommended next steps: analyze commenter profiles (followers, activity, account age), volume and diversity of comments across recent posts, repetition of identical emoji comments, and overall engagement rates before making an ad-purchase decision." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic praise / emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/enthusiasm and boost visible engagement; low informational content about the poster or product." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment: 'Unglaublich 👏👏👏' (German: 'Unbelievable' + clapping emojis). Sentiment is clearly positive and intended to praise or congratulate. With only one short, non-specific comment, there is limited signal about audience quality or genuine interest. Such brief praise/comments are commonly organic (fans, casual viewers) but are also frequently seen in low-effort fake-comment pools or engagement pods. Given the minimal sample size, I assign a modest fakeness probability (35) with moderate uncertainty (confidence 55). For advertising decisions this single comment provides almost no evidence of authentic, engaged community or purchase intent; overall suitability is therefore mid/uncertain (score 50, confidence 45). Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments for diversity, conversational replies, time patterns, commenter profiles (follower counts, account age, activity), and overall engagement rate before deciding on an ad buy." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only", "count": 1, "purpose": "Low-effort positive reaction / approval (expresses enthusiasm). Often used to signal engagement without substantive feedback; can be genuine fan reaction or generic/bot engagement to inflate numbers." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment (\"🔥🔥🔥\") is available. This is a low-information, emoji-only positive reaction that provides weak signal about audience quality or campaign suitability. Emoji-only comments are common from real followers but are also frequently produced by engagement farms or bots; with only one instance the fakeness assessment is uncertain (moderate risk). For advertising decisions this evidence is insufficient: it neither demonstrates meaningful audience interest (no product-specific feedback, no questions, no conversation) nor rules out inorganic engagement. Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: sample multiple posts, examine variety and substance of comments, inspect commenter profiles for authenticity and repeated emoji patterns, check engagement rates (likes/comments) relative to follower count, review follower growth history and story/link interactions. Based on this single comment, I would rate the post's comment-based suitability for advertising as low (30/100) and advise collecting further data." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "acknowledgement/confirmation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short one-word reply ('Erledigt' = 'Done') likely signalling completion of a requested action (e.g., entry to a contest, task completed, admin note). Serves as minimal engagement rather than substantive conversation or promotion." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available and it is a single-word, context-light response ('Erledigt'). That makes it ambiguous: it could be a genuine follower confirming they completed an action, a staff/admin note, or a boilerplate reply used repeatedly. The short, non-promotional nature and absence of typical bot markers (links, emojis, repeated phrases) lean toward genuine but low-effort engagement. However, with such sparse data the confidence is limited. For advertising-feasibility: this single comment indicates very low visible conversational engagement and provides little evidence of an active, responsive audience. Recommendation: request a larger sample of recent comments, engagement rates (comments/likes per follower), look for repeated identical comments across posts, follower quality, and timing patterns before making a buy decision. Based on this single comment, I would rate the post's comment-driven reliability for ad conversions as low." }

Text: Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic compliment / positive sentiment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and positive reinforcement (express admiration of appearance; increases visible positive engagement)" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍\". This is a short, generic flattering message with an emoji. Such comments are common from genuine followers but also typical of low-effort bot/comment-farm output. There are no personal details, no conversation thread, no product mention, and no engagement indicators (questions, long text, or references to past posts) that would strongly indicate a real, invested follower. Given that single short compliment, I assess a low-to-moderate likelihood of fakeness rather than high certainty (fakeness_score 30, confidence 60). For advertising feasibility this single data point is insufficient: overall_score 40 with moderate confidence 50 reflects limited positive sentiment but weak evidence of authentic, valuable engagement. Recommendation: examine more comments (volume, diversity, timing), commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), like-to-comment ratios, and whether comments include specific references to content or products before making a final buy decision." }

Text: Nice! Ich schau es mir eine Million mal an und raff es trotzdem nicht😂😂😂😂

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine organic engagement (humorous/confused)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses amusement/confusion about the post, signals genuine viewer engagement and entertainment value rather than promotional intent or a call-to-action." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as authentic: it uses natural German phrasing, conveys a specific reaction (watching many times and not understanding), and includes multiple laughing emojis. It is not a generic promotional line, contains no links/tags/asks, and shows personality — all indicators of a real user responding spontaneously. Fakeness is therefore low. However, this comment provides little information about purchase intent or the audience's propensity to convert for advertising. It primarily signals entertainment engagement, which is positive for reach and perceived authenticity but not a direct indicator of commercial impact. \n\nCaveats and recommendations: assessment is based on one comment only. To evaluate advertising feasibility reliably, analyze a larger sample of comments for patterns (repetitive/generic comments, language uniformity, timing spikes), check commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), look at comment-to-like ratios across posts, and detect repeated phrases that suggest bot farms or engagement pods. If most comments resemble this one (varied, contextual, emoji-rich, language-mixed), that strengthens indicators of a genuine audience; if instead you see many generic compliments, single-word emojis, or repeated text, fakeness risk rises." }

Text: Sehr schön und sehr einfach 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive approval and encouragement; provides social proof and engagement (short, generic positive feedback)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Sehr schön und sehr einfach 👏👏') is a short, positive German-language compliment with clapping emojis. This pattern is typical of genuine follower praise but is also a common, generic phrase that can appear in both organic and low-effort paid/bot engagement. Given only one comment, there is very limited evidence to judge authenticity: nothing in the text strongly indicates automation (no nonsensical tokens, no obvious spammy links), but its generic wording reduces signal strength. For influencer advertising feasibility, this isolated positive comment is mildly encouraging (shows at least some engagement and resonance), but it is insufficient to conclude healthy, authentic audience interaction. Recommended next steps before purchasing advertising: collect a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, check for repeated/templated phrases and commenter profile authenticity (account age, follower counts, posting history), measure likes-to-followers and comments-to-followers ratios, and verify audience language/demographics match the campaign. Based on the lone comment, assign a cautious midpoint overall feasibility score; more data is needed to raise confidence." }

Text: Sehr schön muss ich mal ausprobieren 😍💯👍❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive interest / intent to try", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine-looking praise and expression of intent to try the product/service; serves as social proof and engagement (uses emojis to amplify positivity)." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment analysis: the comment 'Sehr schön muss ich mal ausprobieren 😍💯👍❤️' is short, specific enough and uses natural language plus varied emojis, which are typical of genuine user reactions. There are no obvious markers of automation (no repeated templates, no promotional links, no username mentions). Fakeness risk is low (estimated 10/100) but confidence is moderate because this is only one data point. For advertising feasibility: this single positive comment provides limited evidence — it shows some audience interest but not enough volume or diversity to reliably judge engagement quality or conversion potential. Recommend reviewing a larger sample of recent comments, commenter profiles (age, activity, follower counts), engagement rate relative to follower count, and presence of repetitive/generic comments before making a buy decision." }

Text: Oh sehr schön 😍 muss ich direkt mal ausprobieren ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive praise / product interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses liking and immediate intent to try the item; serves as positive social proof and indicates purchase consideration." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: a short, enthusiastic German-language message with emojis (“Oh sehr schön 😍 muss ich direkt mal ausprobieren ❤️”). Content is generic praise plus stated intent to try — typical of genuine user reactions. There are no obvious bot markers (repeated text, links, unnatural punctuation, username-patterns) in this single sample, so likelihood of it being fake is low (fakeness score 10). Confidence is moderate-high because a single comment is a very small sample and some low-effort fake accounts can mimic this style. \n\nFor advertising-purchase feasibility: the single positive comment alone is weak evidence. It signals at least one engaged user and potential purchase interest, but it does not demonstrate broad, authentic engagement or an active community. I give an overall feasibility score of 30/100 with moderate confidence because more data is needed (total comment volume, like-to-follower ratio, distribution of comment types, replies, timing of comments, audience demographics, and presence of repeated/generic comments across posts). \n\nRecommendation: obtain a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts, timestamps, follower metrics, and the ratio of meaningful (personalized, specific) comments vs. generic praise. Also check for recurring commenter accounts, comment velocity after posting, and language consistency with the influencer’s audience before making an advertising decision." }

Text: Werde es auf jeden Fall ausprobieren 🤗🎉 Danke liebe Ina 🎉🎉🍀💚

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive engagement / intent-to-try", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses appreciation to the influencer and signals intent to try the product/activity (social proof / endorsement)." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment (“Werde es auf jeden Fall ausprobieren 🤗🎉 Danke liebe Ina 🎉🎉🍀💚”) reads as a genuine positive reaction: it addresses the influencer by name, thanks her, and explicitly states the commenter will try the product, with supportive emojis. These features (personalization, natural phrasing, intent statement, varied emojis) lean toward authenticity rather than a canned bot response. However, with only one comment provided there is very limited evidence: the comment could still be from a friendly bot or a coordinated group, and there is no context on commenter account quality, comment timing, or overall engagement volume. For advertising-feasibility decisions this single comment is a small positive datapoint but insufficient on its own. Recommended next checks: volume and diversity of comments, commenter profile quality (age, follower count, posting history), timing and concentration of comments, ratio of likes to comments, and prevalence of repetitive/generic praise across posts." }

Text: Ina, kannst die Farben aufschreiben, die du benutzt hast

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Product inquiry (genuine follower)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking the influencer to list the colors used — shows specific interest in the content/product and intent to replicate or purchase." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ("Ina, kannst die Farben aufschreiben, die du benutzt hast") appears authentic: it uses the influencer's name, asks a specific, contextual question and shows intent to get product details. There are no signs typical of fake or bot comments (no generic praise, no hashtags/links, no emojis repeated, no solicitation). Fakeness risk is low (score 5) but confidence is limited by the very small sample (confidence 75). Overall this comment is a positive signal for advertising suitability—it indicates engaged followers who may seek product recommendations—but one comment is insufficient to conclude broadly. Recommendation: review a larger sample of comments, engagement rate, commenter profiles (real accounts, follower counts, activity) and look for repetitive/generic patterns before finalizing ad purchase decisions." }

Text: Tolle einfache Technik, nur mit einem Wattestäbchen und Lidschatten verschwinden die Schlupflider👏👏👏 probiere ich unbedingt mal aus 🤗😘❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive engagement / endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise of the technique (social proof) and expresses intent to try — supports credibility and encourages others" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is positive, specific and reads as organic: it references concrete details ('Wattestäbchen und Lidschatten'), applauds the result, and states an intention to try the method. These features reduce the likelihood it's a generic bot/spam message. Emoji use is natural and aligns with typical beauty-audience engagement. However, this is only one comment — a very small sample — so while this particular comment signals genuine interest and provides useful social proof for a beauty-related post, broader conclusions about overall audience authenticity should be deferred until more comments, likes, commenter account checks (age, follower count, posting history), timing patterns, and reply interactions are reviewed. Recommendations: inspect commenter profiles for real activity, review comment distribution across other posts, and check like-to-comment ratios before finalizing an ad purchase decision." }

Text: Ich werde es ausprobieren 🙌

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive intent / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses intention to try the product/service; serves as social proof and positive feedback for the post." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: \"Ich werde es ausprobieren 🙌\" (\"I will try it\"). It is brief, context-appropriate, and uses a natural phrase and emoji — characteristics more consistent with a real user than with a templated bot reply. Fakeness risk is low but not zero because single short comments can also be generic and sometimes used in engagement farms. Because only one comment is available, this sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall audience authenticity or influencer quality. For advertising purchase feasibility: this single comment is mildly positive evidence (shows interest) but is insufficient alone to justify investment. Recommend reviewing a larger sample of comments, overall comment-to-follower ratio, reply patterns, timing of comments, follower quality, and other engagement metrics before making a buy decision." }

Text: Oh schön...das würde mich interessieren

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive_interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses genuine interest in the content; signals potential for follow-up engagement or inquiry." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: 'Oh schön...das würde mich interessieren' (German: 'Oh nice... I'd be interested'). This reads as a brief, naturally phrased expression of interest with no obvious bot/spam markers (no links, no repeated template, correct language). Given the small sample, the assessed fakeness is low (10) but confidence is limited because short generic comments can occasionally be low-effort bot output. For advertising feasibility the data is insufficient: one seemingly genuine comment indicates minimal visible engagement on this post, so I rate overall suitability as moderate–low (40). To make a reliable decision, analyze a larger set of comments, commenter account quality (follower counts, recent activity), comment timing patterns (clustering), like-to-follower ratio, and diversity of responses." }

Text: Toll siehst du immer aus 🤩

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement and social approval — short, upbeat praise likely intended to show support and increase engagement (likes/vanity). Low informational value for advertisers; could be from a genuine follower or a low-effort/bulk commenter." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Toll siehst du immer aus 🤩' is a generic positive compliment. As an isolated data point it provides weak evidence of authentic, purchase-intent engagement: it signals follower appreciation but offers no product-related detail, question, or endorsement. Generic praise like this is common both among real fans and among purchased/bot comments (especially when repeated across posts). Given only one short comment, I assess moderate likelihood of fakeness (45/100) with limited confidence (40/100). For advertising decisions you should not rely on this alone — perform a broader audit: check a large sample of recent comments for repetition or copy-paste patterns, inspect commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history, avatar, bio), review timing (many comments in short windows), examine other engagement metrics (like-to-follower ratio, saves, story replies, link clicks) and request past campaign performance or run a small paid test. Based on the current evidence, the comment profile is neutral-to-slightly-negative for ad-buy confidence; recommend deeper investigation before committing." }

Text: Mega 🙌 danke 🙏🏾 für diese tollen Tips☺️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive praise / Thank-you", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation for content, reinforce value of the post, simple engagement (likes/comments signal to algorithm that content is appreciated)." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment is a short, natural-sounding German-language thank-you with supportive emojis ('Mega 🙌 danke 🙏🏾 für diese tollen Tips☺️'). Characteristics (language matched to post, varied emojis, specific mention of 'tips') suggest a genuine appreciative follower rather than a spammy or promotional bot message. However, this is only one data point — conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality are limited. For advertising feasibility, this example is a mild positive signal (real engagement and appreciation), but you should review more comments, commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, comment patterns), comment timing/repetition, and overall engagement rate before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive_generic_comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback / simple engagement — signals appreciation or acknowledgement of content; may be genuine follower praise or a minimal generic response." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment ('Sehr informativ') is available. It reads as a generic positive reaction and could be from a genuine follower, a casual viewer, or a low-effort bot; there is insufficient data to strongly judge authenticity. Fakeness is assessed as low-to-moderate (25) but confidence is low (35) because of the tiny sample size. Overall advertising-feasibility is rated neutral (50) with low confidence (30). To make a reliable recommendation, analyze a larger set of comments, comment-to-follower ratio, comment diversity (languages, content variety), timing patterns, commenter profiles (activity, follower counts), and other engagement metrics (likes, saves, story interactions)." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (heart)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express a positive reaction/like or quick support. Low informational value — common casual engagement that could originate from a genuine follower, an engagement pod member, or a bot/account farm." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided (a single heart emoji). That comment is generic positive engagement and by itself gives very little signal about audience authenticity or ad suitability. Emoji-only comments are common among real followers but are also frequently produced by bots or engagement exchange groups, so there is a non-negligible false-positive risk. Due to the extremely limited sample, the fakeness assessment is tentative (fakeness 25/100, confidence 45/100) and the overall recommendation for advertising feasibility is cautious/moderately low (30/100, confidence 35/100).\n\nRecommendations: collect the full comment set for the post, sample commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, posting behavior), comment timestamps (bursting patterns), reply/like counts on comments, and overall post engagement rate to make a reliable decision." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive praise / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Show appreciation for content (engagement/relationship building). Likely intended to signal approval and encourage the creator; could also serve to boost visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍\" (\"I love your tips\"). This is a short, positive, emoji-rich compliment in the account's language, which leans toward being a genuine follower reaction. However, such generic praise is also commonly used by low-effort bots or paid-comment networks, so absolute certainty is low. Given the single-item sample there is insufficient evidence to judge overall audience quality or authenticity for advertising decisions. Recommended next steps before buying ads: obtain a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts, check comment-to-like and comment-to-follower ratios, inspect commenter profiles for real activity (profile pictures, posting history, follower counts), look for repeated phrases or identical emojis across commenters, and review reply threads and audience demographics. With current data I rate the comments as likely genuine but shallow (fakeness 25) and the overall comment signal for ad-feasibility as weak (overall score 35)." }

Text: Was ist das von einer Lippenstift? Der ist ja wunderschön und ich mag solche Farbe. Vielen Dank Voraus.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking what lipstick/brand/shade is used — seeking purchase or product-identification information." }, { "type": "Compliment / positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses admiration for the color/appearance, signaling positive sentiment toward the showcased product." }, { "type": "Engagement / interest signal", "count": 1, "purpose": "Generates interaction on the post and signals potential purchase intent or follow-up (expects reply)." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment appears authentic and organic: it contains a specific product question in German, a genuine-sounding compliment, and a polite 'thank you' — phrasing that is typical of real followers rather than bot-like templates. Fakeness is low (10/100) with moderate-high confidence because the comment is specific and conversational. As a signal for advertising feasibility, this is a positive but limited indicator: it shows product interest from a (likely) real German-speaking follower, which is good for beauty/ lipstick campaigns. However, this assessment is based on a single data point; before purchasing ad space or a campaign, analyze a larger sample of comments (volume, diversity, repeated/identical comments), commenter account authenticity (profiles, follower counts, activity), overall engagement rate, audience demographics and reach. With more consistent, similar comments across posts, confidence in the influencer's suitability would increase." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short compliment / generic positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "express approval / social validation (likes the visual: color); low informational value and no purchase intent" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: 'Schöne Farbe 😍' (\"Nice color\"). This is a brief, positive, low-effort reaction typical of genuine followers who appreciate the aesthetic. It contains an emoji and no product-specific language or call-to-action. With one example there is very little evidence of coordinated or automated activity, but the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions about overall audience authenticity. For advertising decisions, this comment indicates simple positive sentiment but not strong purchase intent or detailed engagement. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent comments across multiple posts, look for repeated phrasing or identical emoji usage (signs of bots or comment pods), check engagement rate and follower quality, and examine comments that reference product experience or ask questions (higher value for ad feasibility)." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Appreciation / Thank-you", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback and relationship-building (social proof; signals that the follower found the content useful)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️' reads as a genuine appreciative reply: it directly addresses the creator by name, gives thanks for 'tips', and includes an emoji. These features (personalization, topical reference, emoji) decrease the likelihood of it being a bot or paid fake engagement, hence a low fakeness score (15). Confidence is limited because this analysis is based on only one comment; patterns that indicate inauthenticity (repetitive wording across many comments, generic praise from accounts with no profile pictures or few followers, or comment timing clusters) cannot be evaluated. For ad-buy decisions this single positive comment provides minimal supporting evidence—useful as a small signal of valued content but insufficient to judge overall audience quality or engagement authenticity. Recommend collecting: (1) larger sample of comments, (2) commenter profile checks (age, follower count, posting history), (3) comment timing and repetition analysis, and (4) overall engagement rate metrics before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Deine manicure ist so schön. Erzähl uns mal bitte auch etwas über deine Handpflege. Du hast wunderschöne Hände.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "To flatter the creator and provide positive social proof (boosts perceived popularity/appeal)." }, { "type": "Content request / Engagement prompt", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks the influencer for more information (invites follow-up content and further engagement)." }, { "type": "Niche-specific interest / Product curiosity", "count": 1, "purpose": "Signals interest in handcare/manicure-related content or products — potential consumer intent for related ads." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads natural and specific (mentions 'manicure' and asks about 'Handpflege'), which makes it unlikely to be a generic bot or paid/generic compliment. It serves three functions simultaneously: praise (social proof), a direct request for more content (increases creator-driven engagement opportunities), and an expression of niche interest (useful for beauty/handcare advertisers). As a positive signal, this comment supports the influencer's relevance for beauty or hand-care campaigns. However, this is only one data point — confidence is limited. Before making an advertising buy decision, review a larger sample of comments for repetition/generic language, check commenter profiles for authenticity (recent accounts, no posts, spammy usernames), examine timing patterns, and compare engagement rates vs. follower count. If many comments show similarly specific, unsolicited requests and compliments from authentic accounts, that strengthens the case for purchase; if comments are mostly short, generic, or repeated phrases, treat engagement as likely inflated." }

Text: Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product_inquiry + compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which product is used (seeking purchase/recommendation) and express admiration; indicates genuine interest and potential intent to buy." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍') appears genuine: it asks for the specific eyeshadow and praises the color. This combines direct product interest with positive sentiment, which is useful for brand/advertiser signals (potential for conversion or follow-up conversation). Fakeness is low because the wording is specific and conversational rather than generic praise or emoji-only. However, this is only one data point — you cannot reliably assess overall audience authenticity or ad-readiness from a single comment. For an actionable advertising decision, review a larger sample of recent comments, the like-to-comment ratio, comment diversity (questions, critiques, tagging), response rate from the influencer, and follower quality (demographics, activity). Indicators to watch for that would lower the feasibility score: many repetitive/generic comments, high volume of short emoji-only replies, sudden spikes in low-quality comments, or very low influencer reply rate. With the current minimal sample, the post shows some positive signal but is insufficient alone to recommend advertising spend." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 8, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "engagement/question/critical", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask for clarification about the appearance of the influencer's lips (possible critique about over-applied makeup); indicates attentive, product-related engagement" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?' — 'Are your lips over-painted here?') reads as a genuine, conversational question from a follower rather than a generic promotional or bot-style message. Its purpose is to seek clarification and subtly criticize or question the makeup look; this indicates audience attention to product/aesthetic details, which is useful for brand partners in beauty/cosmetics. However, the sample size is extremely small — one comment alone is insufficient to judge overall authenticity or audience quality decisively. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of comments for repetition, timing patterns, commenter profiles (real accounts vs. bots), like-to-comment ratio, and comment diversity to assess engagement health before making advertising decisions." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_like", "count": 1, "purpose": "express positive sentiment/affection/support; low-effort engagement to signal approval or attention without substantive feedback" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment — a heart emoji — is present. This is a generic positive engagement signal that carries very little informational value about audience quality or intent. Such comments are commonly genuine expressions of support from real followers but are also frequently produced by low-effort bot accounts or mass-engagement services. Given the extremely small sample, the likelihood of fakeness is judged low-to-moderate (fakeness_score 15) but with low confidence because one data point is insufficient to generalize. For advertising decisions this comment alone is not meaningful: it neither indicates strong interest in product-related content nor provides evidence of an engaged, relevant audience. Recommend collecting more data before purchase — e.g., number of comments, comment variety and depth, like-to-comment ratio, timing distribution, commenter profile checks (age, follower counts, activity), follower growth history, and engagement rates across multiple posts — to form a reliable assessment." }

Text: Ich hab nicht Mal genug Lippe um sie voller zu schminken 😂 aber bei dir schaut alles super aus 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive engagement (personalized)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and social bonding; validation of the influencer's appearance with an aspirational/self-comparative tone (follower contrasts themselves with influencer)." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment is a personalized, colloquial German message with emoji and self-deprecating humor: \"I don't even have enough lip to make them fuller with makeup 😂 but on you everything looks great 😍\". This reads as authentic follower engagement (not a generic bot or spam): it references a specific physical trait, uses natural language and emojis, and offers a genuine compliment. Fakeness risk is low based on this message alone, but the sample size is one comment — insufficient to infer overall audience authenticity or activity. For advertising decisions: the tone is positive and indicates an engaged follower mindset, but one comment does not demonstrate consistent, scalable engagement. Recommend collecting a larger sample of comments, overall engagement rate, follower demographics, and comment diversity before purchasing ads or sponsorships." }

Text: Ich finde das sieht so komisch aus, aus der Nähe, wenn man etwas weiter außen "malt". Oder mache ich etwas falsch?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 65, "comment_types": [ { "type": "constructive feedback / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express an observation about the technique shown and ask for clarification or help (engagement seeking; topic-relevant feedback)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a topic-specific, context-aware remark asking whether the viewer is doing something wrong because the result looks odd up close when they 'paint' further out. The wording is natural, specific and includes a question, which are signs of genuine user engagement rather than bot/generic praise. As a signal for influencer advertising feasibility, this is positive in terms of comment quality — it shows an interested, relevant follower — but the sample size is very small (one comment), so the overall engagement volume appears low. Recommendation: treat this as a quality engagement indicator but verify broader comment volume, timing patterns, follower authenticity and recurring conversational comments across other posts before committing to advertising spend." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short compliment / descriptor", "count": 1, "purpose": "Brief positive remark about appearance ('full lips'); likely meant as a compliment or note of interest (could indicate interest in lip-related product/service)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short foreign-language comment ('Volle Lippen' — German for 'full lips') is available, so conclusions are highly limited. The comment is ambiguous: it reads as a genuine, brief compliment or observation, but its brevity and lack of context mean it could also come from a low-effort account or automated source. Given the small sample, fakeness is assessed as low-to-moderate (25) but with low confidence (30). Overall suitability of this post for advertising cannot be judged from a single comment; current assessment is neutral (50) with low confidence. Recommendation: analyze a larger set of comments, commenter profiles (account age, follower count, posting history), comment timing and patterns, like-to-comment ratio, and presence of repetitive/comment templates before making any ad-purchase decision." }

Text: Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Praise / endorsement (generic)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback / social proof — expresses agreement with the creator and signals intent to follow their advice." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is short, positive and somewhat generic: \"Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön. Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.\" Linguistic cues: polite thanks, absolute statement of agreement, and exaggerated praise (\"perfekten Tipps\"). These characteristics are consistent with a genuine engaged follower, but also typical of low-effort bot or fake-comment patterns (generic praise, lack of personalization, slight grammatical awkwardness). With only one comment it's impossible to be certain. For an advertising-purchase decision this comment alone provides weak support: it contributes social proof but does not demonstrate deep, authentic engagement (no specifics, no questions, no user history). Recommended next steps before buying ads: analyze more comments for repetition and variety, inspect commenter profiles (account age, follower/following ratio, posting history), check timestamps for bursts, count comment likes/replies, and compare language diversity. Based on this single sample I rate the comment as leaning slightly toward possibly inauthentic (hence fakeness 40) but with low-to-moderate confidence; overall suitability of the post for advertising is borderline (overall score 45) and should be confirmed with broader data." }

Text: Ein Business MakeUp für Fotoshooting würde mich interessieren. 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Genuine interest / content request", "count": 1, "purpose": "User asks for a specific tutorial or service (business makeup for a photoshoot). Signals intent, positive interest and potential conversion." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a context-specific, positively phrased request (German, with a heart-eyes emoji) asking for a business makeup for a photoshoot. It reads as a genuine follower asking for content or a service rather than a generic or promotional bot comment. Fakeness likelihood is low because the message is specific, grammatically normal, and contains no link, username tag, repeated phrase, or generic praise. Confidence is moderate-high for this comment but limited overall because the sample size is one. For advertising feasibility this comment is a positive signal of audience interest in makeup-related content and potential receptiveness to paid promotions, but you should analyze a larger set of comments, engagement rates, commenter account quality, timing patterns, and follower authenticity before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 25, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 20, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic short compliment / emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express praise and positive sentiment; surface-level engagement providing social proof. Low-effort interaction that can come from a genuine casual follower or automated/generic accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: a short, positive message with an emoji ('Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍'). This is a common pattern for both authentic casual praise and for low-effort/farm comments generated by engagement services or bots. With one short compliment there is insufficient signal to judge audience authenticity or depth of engagement. Given the comment's generic wording and emoji, the likelihood of it being non-organic is moderate, but confidence is low because a single example is not representative. For an advertising decision you should not rely on this comment alone. Recommended next steps: inspect the commenter’s profile(s) (account age, follower count, posting history, bio), check comment diversity and repetition across recent posts, compare likes-to-comments ratio, examine timing patterns (many similar comments in short intervals), and review broader audience metrics (reach, saves, story views, demographic match). Based on the current evidence, I would rate the post’s comment-based suitability for ad purchase as low (30/100) but with low confidence — obtain more comments and account-level engagement data before proceeding." }

Text: Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 75, "overall_confidence": 70, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Purchase inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "A follower asking where the products are available — expresses direct purchase interest and intent to engage with the product" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏') reads as a genuine, purchase-oriented engagement: it contains natural language (German), emoji and a polite request, and is not promotional, repetitive, or link-based as typical spam/bot comments are. Based on this one comment alone the likelihood it is fake is very low (fakeness score 5) with reasonable confidence. For advertising feasibility this comment is a positive signal — it shows product-awareness and buying intent among at least some followers. However, this assessment is limited by sample size (only one comment). To increase confidence, review a larger set of comments for meaningful engagement rate, commenter account authenticity (age, follower count, activity), comment diversity, and frequency of similar inquiries. If most comments are similar and from authentic accounts, the post/influencer is likely valuable for advertising. If similar-looking comments are repetitive or come from low-quality accounts, lower the score accordingly." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short positive praise (emoji + brief text)", "count": 1, "purpose": "express approval/admiration; lightweight engagement signal to the poster and other viewers" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön\" is a short, generic positive reaction (multiple emojis + 'very beautiful' in German). This type of comment commonly appears from genuine followers but is also exactly the format used by low-effort bot or purchased-comment services. With only one comment to analyze there is very limited signal: it indicates positive sentiment but provides no topical relevance, no conversation, no call-to-action, and no evidence of a real user relationship (no question, no tagging, no details).\n\nGiven the brevity and generic nature, I assign a modest fakeness risk (30/100) but with low confidence (35/100) because one comment is insufficient to judge the overall comment authenticity. For advertising feasibility, the observed comments are weak evidence of meaningful organic engagement — score 40/100 with low confidence (30/100). To improve assessment before buying ads consider: (1) audit multiple recent posts for comment diversity, repetition, and timing patterns; (2) inspect commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history, profile pictures) for bot signals; (3) check engagement rate (likes vs. followers vs. comments) and follower growth history; (4) ask the influencer for audience demographics and past campaign performance metrics. Based on this single comment alone, I would not recommend committing budget without a deeper audit." }

Text: Hallo, könntest du bitte sagen welche Lidschatten Palette du für dieses Make-up benutzt hast sind alles schöne warme Korallentöne. Ich würde gerne die Palette wissen. 🙏🏻 vielen Dank.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 8, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / genuine question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used (specific product inquiry). Shows direct interest in the makeup product and potential purchase or replication intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct, polite product inquiry in German asking which eyeshadow palette was used. It references specific color tones (warm coral tones) and includes a polite emoji and thanks, which are typical of genuine audience members seeking product information. There are no signs of generic praise, marketing-speak, or repetitive/templated phrasing that often indicate fake or bot comments. Given only one comment, this is weak but positive signal of authentic interest and potential purchase intent — useful for advertisers who want audience product curiosity. However, this sample is too small to draw firm conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For ad-buy decisions, request more data: full comment set, commenter account details (follower counts, activity), comment timestamps, likes per comment, reply patterns, overall engagement rate, and audience demographics. Based on this single comment, influencer ad-feasibility is moderately promising (score 65) but requires broader evidence to increase confidence." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Critical/negative", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express dissatisfaction or critique (calls out lack of subtlety in the post)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: 'Dezent ist anders' (German, meaning roughly 'this is not subtle'). This is a short, negative remark expressing that the post is too conspicuous. With one brief, language-specific negative comment there is low evidence of coordinated or fake activity; it reads as a genuine user reaction but the sample size is far too small to generalize. For advertising feasibility this single comment is only a minor signal — it suggests at least some viewers perceive the content as not understated, which may or may not matter depending on the brand. Recommend collecting a larger set of comments, engagement metrics (likes, saves, replies), follower authenticity checks, and sentiment distribution before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "A follower asking which products are being used — indicates genuine interest/purchase intent and seeks information; also increases engagement on the post." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: a German-language question 'Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.' This reads as a straightforward product inquiry and likely comes from a real user rather than a bot (natural phrasing, language match). Fakeness is assessed as low (score 10) but with moderate confidence because a single comment is limited evidence. For advertising feasibility: the content of the comment is positive (shows interest) but volume is minimal, so you cannot reliably judge audience quality or engagement rates from this alone. Recommended next steps before purchase: review overall comment volume and diversity across multiple posts, check commenter account(s) for real activity (profile, posting history, follower ratio), examine likes/saves/stories metrics, and look for patterns of repetitive/generic comments that would indicate inauthentic engagement." }

Text: Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express dissatisfaction or critique about the subject's appearance (eyebrows); likely aimed at giving an opinion and/or prompting discussion." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....' is a brief, specific criticism about appearance. Its natural phrasing and specificity make it likely genuine rather than bot-generated (low fakeness). As a lone data point it signals negative sentiment from at least one follower and suggests the audience notices styling, editing, or cosmetic details. However, one comment is insufficient to draw firm conclusions about overall engagement quality or authenticity patterns. For advertising feasibility this comment alone is not decisive — it flags a potential sensitivity in the influencer's audience toward appearance-related content but doesn't indicate widespread negativity or inorganic engagement. Recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments (volume, sentiment distribution, repetition, timing), likes-to-comments ratio, follower quality, and reply behavior before making a final ad-buy decision." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine user asking for clarification about product performance (coverage of pores) — informational engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?') reads like a genuine, specific product question from a real user interested in how the product handles pore coverage. It is not promotional, not overtly short/generic, and does not contain spammy or repetitive patterns typical of bots or purchased comments. Given only one comment to analyze, the fakeness estimate is low (15) but confidence is limited (45) because a single data point cannot reveal overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility the available evidence is insufficient: this comment indicates some real user interest, but you need broader signals (number and variety of comments, timing patterns, likes-to-comments ratio, follower quality, recurring commenters, and account history) before deciding. I recommend requesting the full recent comments dataset, engagement metrics, and follower audit for a reliable buying decision." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "question / inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Information seeking — the commenter asks what the products are, indicating curiosity and potential genuine interest rather than promotion or spam." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was sind das für Produkte ?' / 'What kind of products are these?') is a direct product inquiry and most likely genuine (low likelihood of being fake). It signals curiosity and basic engagement but does not indicate strong purchase intent or enthusiastic endorsement. Because there is only one comment provided, this is an extremely limited sample and cannot be used to reliably assess overall comment authenticity, audience quality, or campaign suitability. For advertising decisions, request a larger comment sample and the influencer's engagement metrics (likes, saves, reach, follower audit, time-series comment patterns, response rate). Current evidence: small positive signal (real user curiosity) but insufficient to recommend a purchase on its own — proceed with caution and request more comprehensive data before committing to advertising spend." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express affection/approval; light engagement signal (low informational value)" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is present and it consists of three heart emojis. Emoji-only comments commonly indicate a quick positive reaction but provide no substantive feedback about the content, purchase intent, or audience sentiment. Such comments can be genuine (fans showing affection) or low-effort engagement from bots/engagement pods — there is not enough context to distinguish. For advertising decisions this is weak evidence of an engaged, responsive audience. Recommend requesting additional metrics (like comments per post, comment diversity, likes-to-followers ratio, audience demographics, recent engagement patterns) or running a small test campaign before committing. If multiple posts show similar low-information comments, treat the account as lower-priority for ad spend unless other metrics justify it." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive reinforcement/engagement (simple compliment, low informational value)" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment \"Richtig schön\" (\"Really beautiful\") is available. This is a low-effort positive remark that provides little evidence either way: it can be a genuine follower expressing appreciation, but the generic nature also matches common bot/engagement-pod behavior. With one comment you cannot reliably judge authenticity or audience quality. For advertising decisions, this comment is low value — it does not indicate purchase intent, detailed interest, or an engaged community. I recommend a broader analysis (comment volume and diversity across multiple posts, commenter profile inspection, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, repeated phrasing across posts) before deciding on ad spend. Based on the single comment, I assess moderate likelihood of inauthenticity (fakeness 40) but with low confidence; overall suitability for advertising from this single datapoint is low (35) and also low confidence." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only approval / low-effort engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm or approval (positive reaction), increase visible engagement; provides little informational value about genuine interest." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('🔥🔥🔥') is a generic, positive emoji reaction. Such comments commonly appear from genuine followers expressing enthusiasm, but they are also frequently produced by engagement pods, low-effort paid commenters, or bots because they are quick and inflate visible engagement without substantive feedback. With only one comment available, there's very limited signal: you cannot reliably judge audience authenticity, sentiment depth, or purchase intent. For advertising-feasibility decisions this single emoji is weak evidence. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, check commenter profiles (activity, follower counts, avatars, bios), look for repeated/comment-similar users across posts, examine timestamps for burst patterns, and compare comment quality ratio to follower count and likes. Based on the current tiny sample, treat engagement as suspect-to-uncertain and request more data before committing ad spend." }

Text: Auch wenn sie botox hätte? Na und? Es geht hier um schminktechnik!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "defensive/supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defends the person in the post against criticism (mentions 'Botox') and redirects the discussion to the post's topic (makeup technique); signals an engaged follower focusing on content rather than controversy." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Auch wenn sie botox hätte? Na und? Es geht hier um schminktechnik!') is short, direct, and defensive — likely a real user defending the subject and steering conversation back to makeup technique. It shows topical engagement rather than generic praise or promotional language, which reduces the likelihood it's an obvious bot or paid generic comment. Fakeness is therefore low (around 10) with moderate-high confidence given the natural phrasing and context, but this judgment is limited by sample size. For advertising feasibility the comment is mildly positive (a follower protecting the influencer and focusing on content), but a single comment is insufficient to conclude audience quality or authenticity. Overall score is moderate (45) reflecting a small positive signal but high uncertainty. Recommend analyzing a larger, time-distributed sample of comments, comment-to-like ratio, follower growth patterns, diversity of commenters, and signs of inorganic behavior (repeated wording, mass emoji/praise, bot-like accounts) before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: Was für eine Verwandlung - wow! 🤩 Natürlich spielen auch die Frisur und die Kleidung mit rein, aber am Ende siehst du deutlich wacher, frischer und jugendlicher aus.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback and social proof — to compliment the creator's transformation, encourage them and signal approval to other viewers." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a context-specific, positive compliment in natural German (mentions hairstyle and clothing, plus a clear outcome: looks more awake/fresh/younger). These details and the phrasing reduce the likelihood it is a generic bot or low-effort paid comment, so fakeness is assessed low (15/100) with moderate-high confidence. However, this is one isolated comment — the sample size is too small to judge the overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising-feasibility decisions this comment is a small positive signal (supportive audience tone), but you should review: a larger sample of recent comments, like-to-follower ratio, comment timestamps, commenter profiles (activity, follower counts, content), and presence of repetitive or generic comments. Based on the single comment alone I give a cautious middling overall score (60/100) with limited confidence (40/100); more data is required for a reliable buy/no-buy decision." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short positive/emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "express positive reaction / engagement (compliment); can serve to signal approval and boost perceived popularity — also commonly used by both real followers and low-effort bot accounts" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided — \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" — is a generic positive reaction using emojis. Such comments are typical of genuine followers giving quick praise, but they are also frequently produced by low-effort engagement accounts or purchased-comment pools because of their short, non-specific nature. With only one comment it is impossible to reliably determine authenticity or audience quality. For influencer-advertising feasibility, this single data point is inconclusive: it indicates some positive engagement but not depth (no question, no product-specific feedback, no conversation). Recommended next checks before purchase: overall comment volume and variety on multiple posts, commenter account profiles (real-looking usernames, posting history, follower counts), timing/patterns of comments (many similar comments posted in short bursts), likes-to-followers ratio, and audience demographics. Based solely on this comment, treat the post as weak evidence of meaningful organic engagement." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short generic positive (emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "simple praise/engagement signal — expresses liking or approval, often used to boost visible engagement. Can come from genuine followers, engagement pods, or automated/bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: 'Wow 😍'. This is an ambiguous, low-information signal. Short, emoji-only comments are common in real audiences but are also frequently produced by engagement pods and bots because they are quick to post and inflate apparent engagement. With one comment it is impossible to draw a reliable conclusion about audience authenticity. The moderate fakeness score reflects that this type of comment is more likely than a long, specific comment to be inorganic, but confidence is low due to the tiny sample. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this evidence is insufficient — the overall score is low. Recommended next steps before purchasing: review a larger sample of comments (diversity, length, specificity), check commenter profiles for activity/age/follower counts, inspect comment timing patterns, compare comment-to-like and comment-to-follower ratios, and look for conversational replies or brand-specific feedback. If multiple comments are similarly generic and from low-quality accounts, treat the influencer as higher-risk for fake engagement." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "user mention / tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "To draw another user's attention to the post. This can be genuine (telling a friend to look) or inorganic (spam/engagement bait, tagging in pods or bot networks)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it is a bare user mention (@rukiyevizercimen). That format is commonly used for: 1) genuine cross-reference (one user asking another to view the post), 2) low-effort engagement from real followers, or 3) inorganic activity such as spam tags or engagement-pod behavior. With no additional comments, no replies, no text content, and no context about the commenter or timing, the signal is weak. The moderately high fakeness score reflects the common use of mention-only comments by spam/bot strategies, but confidence is limited because a single tag can easily be authentic. For ad-buy decisions: this single comment suggests low-quality visible conversation and limited meaningful engagement on the post. Recommend obtaining more data before deciding: full comment list, number of comments/likes, commenter account characteristics (age, follower count, activity), frequency of similar mention-only comments across the influencer's posts, and timing patterns. If multiple posts show many mention-only tags from similar accounts, treat engagement as likely inorganic and reduce ad investment. If further inspection shows diverse, substantive comments and real-looking commenter profiles, the post/influencer may be more suitable." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/thankful", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expressing gratitude and positive engagement with the post (personal appreciation)." }, { "type": "emoji-enhanced praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Use of multiple emojis to amplify emotional tone (enthusiasm/affection)." }, { "type": "generic/low-information", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short, non-specific comment that signals engagement but provides little substantive feedback." }, { "type": "potential bot/spam", "count": 0, "purpose": "Automated or repeated comments often using emojis or short praise (no clear evidence here)." }, { "type": "question/feedback", "count": 0, "purpose": "Requests for information or constructive feedback (none present)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍') is a brief, enthusiastic expression of thanks, combining emojis and a short German phrase. It reads as natural follower engagement (gratitude/praise) rather than promotional copy or a clearly automated message. However, the comment is low-information: it signals positive sentiment but gives no specific feedback about the product/content or intent to purchase. Given there is only one comment provided, conclusions about overall audience quality or authenticity are weak. For advertising-feasibility decisions you should not rely on this single datapoint. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent comments, check commenter account quality (age, follower count, activity pattern), look for repeated phrasing or timing that indicates inauthentic engagement, compare comment rate to follower count and likes, and inspect replies/conversation depth. Based on this single comment alone the fakeness risk appears low, but the evidence base is too small to confidently support an ad buy — assign a cautious/low-to-moderate suitability rating until further data is reviewed." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Supportive / Agreement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement with the post's message; light-positive engagement intended to validate or reinforce the content." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr”) is a short, natural German phrase expressing agreement and a minimalist endorsement. It appears genuine (not overtly promotional, no repeated templates, no suspicious account cues provided), so fakeness is assessed low (15/100) though certainty is limited because only one comment and no metadata (account age, follower counts, posting patterns) are available. Overall engagement evidence is minimal — one organic-seeming agreement comment does not demonstrate broad or targeted audience interest; for advertising-feasibility this is weak support without additional metrics (comment volume, diversity, like-to-comment ratio, follower quality). Recommend collecting more comments and account-level data before making an ad-purchase decision." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_applause", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses approval/celebration or quick positive reaction; serves as low-effort engagement to boost visible interaction." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is four clapping-hand emojis — a generic, low-effort positive reaction. Such comments commonly occur from real followers giving quick praise, but they are also used by automated or low-quality engagement accounts because emojis are safe, simple, and common. With only one comment provided, assessment is limited: low immediate evidence of coordinated or purchased activity, but also low informational value for measuring genuine audience interest. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this type of comment is weak signal: you should request a larger sample of comments, look for more substantive remarks (questions, personal stories, product-specific feedback), check engagement rates relative to follower count, and run a follower authenticity audit before committing to a buy." }

Text: Wie gerne ich immer Frauen, die den Kajal so auftragen ansprechen würde. Aber ich Trau mich nicht 🥹 Ich schwöre fürs Abschminken auf die Emulsion von @ohganicals kaum bekannt, aber besser als alles, was ich davor hatte!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "personal/relational", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses personal feeling (shyness) and relates to the post content to create rapport." }, { "type": "user testimonial / product endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Recommends a specific product (Emulsion) as a personal favorite for makeup removal." }, { "type": "brand mention / tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "Mentions and tags a brand account (@ohganicals), which can raise awareness or act as a mild promotion." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads like a genuine user interaction: natural language, an emoji, a personal anecdote and a specific product recommendation with a tagged brand. There are low signs of automation or templated spam. The brand mention could be an organic recommendation, an unpaid shout-out, or (less likely given the casual tone) a small-scale affiliate/promo — context is missing to determine that. Because this is only one comment, confidence is limited. For advertising feasibility: this comment is a positive signal (engaged follower, product interest, real-sounding testimonial), but you need broader comment patterns and account-level data to be confident. Recommended next checks before purchase: volume of similar meaningful comments, diversity and authenticity of commenters (account age, profile activity, follower counts), repetition of the same brand mention across multiple comments/posts, timing patterns (burst vs steady engagement), and overall engagement rate. Based on this single comment, I rate the likelihood of authentic engagement as fairly good (low fakeness) and the post as moderately suitable for advertising, but further data is required to raise confidence." }

Text: Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Supportive compliment / positive engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses agreement and praise for the influencer's makeup message; serves as social proof and positive reinforcement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏\" (\"You're right — with the right makeup one can achieve a lot\"). It is short, positive and uses emojis, which is typical of genuine audience praise. There are limited signals of automation: the phrasing is natural and grammatically correct (minor spacing), not templated like obvious spam, but its generic positivity means it could also be low-effort engagement (whether organic or bot-driven cannot be determined from one entry.)\n\nFakeness assessment: low-to-moderate likelihood of being fake (score 25) with moderate confidence (60) because the comment reads human but sample size is too small to be certain. Overall advertising feasibility: moderate (score 55) with low-to-moderate confidence (40). A single positive comment gives minimal reassurance of authentic, engaged audience but is insufficient for a buy decision.\n\nRecommendations before purchasing ad space: obtain a larger sample of comments (50–200), check like-to-comment ratio, examine commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), look for repetitive/generic comments, review top comments and timestamps, request audience demographics and past campaign performance (clicks, conversions). Also run follower authenticity checks and compute engagement rate relative to follower count. These steps will raise confidence in the influencer's suitability for advertising." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic short praise / emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive feedback / social validation. Low-information engagement (simple compliment) typically used to signal approval; such comments can come from genuine followers or from low-effort bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Available sample is a single comment: \"Супер 👍\". This is a generic, positive, low-content comment that provides little signal about real audience interest or authenticity. Because the dataset is one short compliment, the likelihood of it being genuine vs automated is ambiguous — hence a middling fakeness score with low confidence. For advertising-feasibility decisions this is weak evidence: comment volume and depth are minimal, so you cannot rely on meaningful organic engagement from this post alone. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of comments across recent posts; check commenter profiles (age, follower counts, avatars, activity); compute engagement rates (likes vs comments vs follower count); look for repeated phrases or comment timing patterns; inspect follower quality and audience demographics. With those additional checks you can raise confidence and produce a reliable buy/no-buy recommendation." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Выражение положительной реакции и личной симпатии (социальное подтверждение)." } ], "interpretation": "Комментарий «Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏» — краткий, эмоциональный и дружелюбный. Уменьшительное обращение «Инночка» и эмодзи указывают на либо реального знакомого/подписчика, либо на лояльного фаната. Отсутствуют признаки явного бот‑поведения (спам‑ссылки, шаблонные фразы на английском, бессвязные наборы символов), но односложный комплимент также характерен для взаимодействия из engagement‑подов или массовых лайк/коммент практик. Поскольку проанализирован только один комментарий, уверенность ограничена и нельзя делать выводы о широте или качестве вовлечённости аудитории в целом. Для оценки рекламной пригодности нужен больше данных: количество и разнообразие комментариев, соотношение комментариев/подписчиков, временные паттерны, профили комментаторов и наличие конкретных обсуждений продукта. На основании этого отдельного комментария можно считать реакцию позитивной, но низкоинформативной для принятия решения о покупке рекламы." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 20, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/encouragement; low informational content. Could be genuine quick engagement or generic/bot-like." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment ('👏👏') is provided. Emoji-only praise is common for genuine, casual engagement but is also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort followers. Given the extremely small sample size, any judgment is uncertain: I assign a moderate fakeness likelihood (40/100) with modest confidence (40/100). For advertising-purchase decisions this comment alone is insufficient evidence of an engaged, authentic audience; overall suitability is inconclusive to low (45/100) with low confidence (20/100). Recommended next steps: analyze a larger set of comments, examine commenter profiles (follow counts, activity, content), check timing patterns and repetition, look for substantive and varied comments, and measure comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios to better assess authenticity and ad-fit." }

Text: Ist es nicht heute?wenn ja,wie komm ich dahin?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine question / logistical inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks whether the event is today and how to get there — indicates real interest/attendance intent and direct engagement with the post content." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided. Its content ('Ist es nicht heute? wenn ja, wie komm ich dahin?') is a natural, context-specific question about timing and directions, showing user interest and relevance to the post. There are no signs of typical bot patterns (generic praise, emojis-only, repeated hashtags, promotional links) — the minor punctuation/capitalization irregularity is consistent with human typing. Given the single-sample limit, overall conclusions are tentative: comment authenticity appears high (low fakeness), but this is insufficient to judge overall audience quality or engagement rate. For advertising decisions, this single genuine comment is a positive signal but not decisive; recommend analyzing a larger comment set, commenter profiles, like counts, comment timestamps, and recurrence of similar messages before finalizing purchase." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Generic positive reaction/praise to the post; serves to boost visible engagement. Could come from a genuine follower, an engagement pod member, or an automated/bot account." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"🔥🔥🔥\". This is a low-information, emoji-only reaction that signals positive sentiment but carries little specific value (no product interest, no questions, no personal testimony). Emoji-only comments are common among real fans but are also frequently produced by bots or engagement pods that aim to inflate engagement metrics. Given a single short comment, the fakeness assessment is uncertain (hence moderate fakeness score and low confidence). For advertising-feasibility decisions, this single comment is insufficient evidence of a high-quality, purchase-intent audience. Recommendation: request a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts, commenter account profiles (age, followers, activity), timing patterns (many similar comments at once), like-to-comment ratios, and historical engagement consistency. Check for repeat generic comments across posts and the presence of substantive comments (questions, testimonials, tags of friends). Until more data is available, treat the comment signal as weak and proceed cautiously when valuing this influencer for ad spend." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive/generic praise (emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and approval; show engagement. Short, low-effort comments like this primarily serve to boost visible engagement and signal positivity, but give limited information about genuine audience interest." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment \"Unglaublich 👏👏👏\" is available. This is a generic positive reaction that could be from a genuine follower or a low-effort/bot account. Its brevity and emoji-only content reduce its informational value for assessing authentic audience connection. With only one comment, there is insufficient evidence to judge overall comment quality or community engagement reliably. For advertiser decision-making, request a larger sample of comments and additional signals (comment volume over time, diversity/depth of comments, commenter account authenticity, likes-to-comments ratio, timing patterns). Based on this single comment the risk of inauthenticity is moderate and the suitability for advertising is low-to-marginal; confidence in these judgments is low due to extremely limited data." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Quick positive reaction / praise and engagement-boost. Low information content; commonly used by genuine followers as well as by low-effort bot/engagement-farm accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). This is a generic positive reaction that increases visible engagement but conveys no substantive feedback. Emoji-only comments are common among real followers but are also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or purchased-comment services because they are low-effort and safe. With one comment there is insufficient evidence to determine authenticity or the quality of the audience. For advertising-feasibility decisions this comment is neutral — it signals some positive sentiment but provides no proof of meaningful audience interest, conversion potential, or authentic community interaction. Recommendation: collect more data (full comment sample, commenter account details, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratio, follower growth spikes) before deciding on ad spend. If the overall comment set is similarly short, generic and repetitive, treat engagement as potentially low-quality and demand more robust KPIs or run a small test campaign first." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "single-word acknowledgement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Administrative confirmation or low-effort engagement (e.g., collaborator saying 'done', or a follower leaving a short reactive comment). Could also be a generic/bot comment from engagement pods or automation." } ], "interpretation": "The only provided comment is a single German word, \"Erledigt\" (\"Done\"). That kind of short, context-free reply is ambiguous: it may be an internal/administrative confirmation (team member or collaborator marking a task complete), a low-effort follower reaction, or automated/generic engagement from a bot or engagement pod. As a signal for advertising feasibility this is weak — it does not show meaningful audience interaction, discussion, or genuine endorsement of content. Given the lack of conversational context, number of unique commenters, likes, and other comments, I rate the comment set as likely low-quality/partially inauthentic (fakeness 65) but with moderate uncertainty. Overall I assess the post's comment-driven advertising value as low (30): not enough authentic, topical engagement to support a confident ad purchase decision. Recommendation: request a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (follower counts, activity), engagement rates over multiple posts, and timing/patterns before making a buying decision." }

Text: Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Personal praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and provide positive social feedback (engagement). Could be genuine follower praise, a low-effort bot/template comment to increase apparent engagement, or an attempt to get attention from the influencer." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: 'Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍' (Dear Ina, you have a beautiful face). This is a simple, positive compliment with an emoji. Strengths: it signals positive sentiment and supplies social validation. Weaknesses: it is highly generic and matches common bot/spam templates used to inflate engagement (short praise + emoji). With one example it is impossible to reliably judge authenticity or audience relevance. Fakeness scored at 50/100 (moderate likelihood of being generic/automated), confidence 40/100 because of the extremely small sample. For advertising feasibility the score is 45/100 with low confidence (30/100); a single benign comment is insufficient evidence of a healthy, authentic, targetable audience. Recommendation: before purchasing ads or partnerships, collect and analyze a larger sample of comments and commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, posting frequency, comment diversity), check ratios (likes/comments/followers), look for brand- or product-related comments, conversation threads, and timing patterns. Also review recent posts for consistency of engagement and authentic interactions." }

Text: Nice! Ich schau es mir eine Million mal an und raff es trotzdem nicht😂😂😂😂

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive_engagement_humorous_confusion", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses amusement and confusion about the content; signals genuine attention and informal engagement (laughing emojis, personal phrasing)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a genuine, informal reaction: the user says they watch the post many times yet still don't understand it, punctuated by laughing emojis. It lacks common bot indicators (no links, no generic one-word praise, no repeated patterns) and uses natural, specific phrasing, so fakeness is very low. However, this is only one data point. For advertising feasibility you need more information: number of comments, diversity of commenters, commenter profiles, timing patterns, like-to-follower ratios, and presence of repetitive/generic comments. Based on this comment alone, the audience appears engaged and authentic in this instance, so the post shows potential, but the overall assessment is tentative due to insufficient sample size." }

Text: Sehr schön und sehr einfach 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/compliment (short, generic)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval and provide social proof/engagement; short generic wording and emojis may be low-effort organic engagement or from low-effort bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: a short German compliment with applauding emojis. This is a positive engagement signal but the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions about audience quality or authenticity. Short, generic praise often appears in genuine follower interactions but is also commonly produced by bots or engagement pods. Given the single data point, I rate fakeness as low-to-moderate (25) with moderate confidence (60) because the comment content is plausible for a real follower but lacks identifying detail. For advertising purchase feasibility, the available evidence is insufficient (overall score 40, confidence 30). Recommended next steps: collect a larger sample of comments across recent posts, inspect commenter profiles for real accounts (profile pictures, posting history, follower counts, bios), check comment timing patterns, comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios, repetition of phrases across comments, and engagement on multiple posts before making a buying decision." }

Text: Sehr schön muss ich mal ausprobieren 😍💯👍❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive / Intent-to-try", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and expressed intent to try the product; engagement (supports post and signals potential genuine interest)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Sehr schön muss ich mal ausprobieren 😍💯👍❤️\" is in natural German and contains a clear, context-relevant statement plus multiple emojis. This pattern (specific intent to try + emojis) is more consistent with a genuine follower than with obvious bot/farm spam, which tends to be either single-word generic praise, off-topic, repeated across posts, or includes links/hashtags. However, it's still a relatively generic positive remark and from only one comment we cannot draw strong conclusions about overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this one comment is mildly favorable but insufficient: recommend analyzing a larger sample of recent comments, commenter profiles (age, follower count, activity), comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and looking for repeated copy/paste comments or unnatural timing to better estimate audience authenticity and conversion likelihood." }

Text: Oh sehr schön 😍 muss ich direkt mal ausprobieren ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "organic_positive_engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and expressed intent to try the product; signals interest and potential conversion." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: a German-language, enthusiastic response with emojis ('Oh sehr schön 😍 muss ich direkt mal ausprobieren ❤️'). The tone is natural and specific (expresses intent to try), which suggests genuine user interest rather than a generic bot reply. Given the single data point, overall evidence is limited — low immediate signs of fabricated engagement but insufficient volume to draw firm conclusions. For advertising decisions, this comment is a positive signal about message resonance, but you should analyze more comments (variety, repetition, commenter profiles), engagement rates relative to follower count, and account authenticity before committing budget. Recommended next checks: commenter account authenticity, comment frequency/patterns across posts, like-to-comment ratio, and presence of repetitive/generic replies." }

Text: Werde es auf jeden Fall ausprobieren 🤗🎉 Danke liebe Ina 🎉🎉🍀💚

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 65, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses intent to try the product and thanks the influencer (shows interest, goodwill, and follower relationship)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a friendly, specific, and natural-sounding endorsement in German: 'Werde es auf jeden Fall ausprobieren ... Danke liebe Ina'. It signals a follower who intends to try the product and shows gratitude toward the influencer, characteristics consistent with genuine engagement. Fakeness risk appears low (score 15) because the language is personalized and not generic or spammy, but with only one comment available there remains some uncertainty. For advertising decisions this is a small positive signal but insufficient alone — recommend analyzing the wider comment set, commenter profiles (age, activity, follower counts), timing patterns, comment diversity, like counts on comments, and overall engagement rate before committing budget. Additional checks (bot detection, repeated phrasing across posts, follower authenticity) will raise confidence in the influencer's audience quality." }

Text: Ina, kannst die Farben aufschreiben, die du benutzt hast

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine question / product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which colors were used — informational request that signals interest in replicating the look and potential purchase or engagement intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a straightforward, specific question in natural language addressed to the poster (Ina). It reads like a real follower asking for details (colors used), which indicates genuine interest and modest purchase intent. Fakeness is low because the text is contextual, personalized, and not generic or promotional. However, this is only one data point: you cannot reliably assess overall audience authenticity or influencer suitability from a single comment. For an advertising decision, request a larger sample (multiple posts, comment variety, likes, commenter profiles, timing patterns) and calculate engagement rate and commenter authenticity before committing." }

Text: Tolle einfache Technik, nur mit einem Wattestäbchen und Lidschatten verschwinden die Schlupflider👏👏👏 probiere ich unbedingt mal aus 🤗😘❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive genuine user endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise of technique, social proof, expresses intent to try (potential conversion signal)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German) reads as a specific, enthusiastic endorsement: it references the exact technique shown ('with a cotton swab and eyeshadow'), applauds the result, and states an intention to try it, plus several emojis. Those characteristics (specific details, expressed intent, natural phrasing and emoji use) reduce the likelihood it is a bot or generic spam. Fakeness is therefore low (score ~12) though not zero — it could be a paid/seeded comment or from a fan account. Because this analysis is based on only one comment, confidence in broader conclusions is limited. For advertising purchase feasibility, this comment is a small positive signal (shows real user interest and easy-to-replicate technique), but it is insufficient by itself to recommend spending. Recommended next steps: obtain the full comment set for the post, analyze comment diversity (varied phrasing, languages, timing), check commenter accounts for authenticity (profile age, follower/following ratio, activity), compute engagement rate relative to follower count, and look for repeated/generic comments across multiple posts. These checks will materially increase confidence in whether the influencer's audience is real and valuable for ads." }

Text: Ich werde es ausprobieren 🙌

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Trial intent / interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "User expresses intention to try the product/service (potential conversion interest; positive but non-committal)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Ich werde es ausprobieren 🙌\". This is a short, positive statement indicating the commenter intends to try the product and is likely genuine — it contains a clear intention and an emoji, not a copy-paste promotional line. However, a single comment is an extremely small sample, so conclusions are limited. For influencer advertising feasibility this comment is a small positive signal (real user interest), but not sufficient evidence of broad authentic engagement or conversion potential. Recommended next steps: examine the full comment set, commenter profiles (age, follower count, posting history), overall engagement rates (likes, saves, comment diversity), timing patterns, and look for repeated/generic phrasing across multiple comments to detect inorganic activity." }