Job: @beauty_by_ina_heinrich

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive generic feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise/acknowledgement — short affirmation that the content is informative; signals lightweight engagement rather than detailed interest or conversation." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short comment was provided: \"Sehr informativ\" (\"Very informative\"). This is a low-effort, positive reaction that tells us the post generated at least minimal appreciation but provides no depth (no questions, no product mentions, no tagging, no discussion). Such brief, generic comments can be genuine but are also commonly produced by engagement pods or bots, so authenticity is uncertain — hence a low fakeness score but moderate uncertainty. For advertising-feasibility decisions this single comment is insufficient: it suggests superficial engagement rather than a highly engaged, responsive audience. Recommendation: obtain a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, check comment diversity (questions, user-specific replies), reply rates from the influencer, timing patterns, and compare comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios before deciding on an ad purchase." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_only_positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "express positive sentiment/affection; low-effort engagement that boosts visible activity but conveys no substantive feedback" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment (a heart emoji) is present. That type of comment signals positive sentiment but has very low informational value: it does not indicate purchase intent, detailed approval, or topic relevance. Emoji-only comments are common from genuine followers but are also the easiest to automate, so there is moderate uncertainty about authenticity. Given the extremely small sample (one comment), you cannot reliably assess audience quality or engagement health for ad-buy decisions. Recommendation: obtain more data — number and diversity of comments across multiple recent posts, like-to-comment ratio, commenter account profiles (age, follower counts, activity), timing patterns, and audience demographics — before proceeding. Based on this single comment, the post provides insufficient evidence of high-quality, authentic engagement; treat the result as low confidence and require further verification before committing ad spend." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive compliment (short praise + emojis)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Social proof / positive reinforcement — signals approval of the creator's content, increases visible engagement. Could be genuine fan feedback or a low-effort engagement intended to boost metrics." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍\" is a short, generic positive remark with emoji emphasis. Key signals: brevity, no personalization (no reference to a specific tip or experience), and use of multiple heart-eye emojis. These traits are common both in genuine quick praise from followers and in automated/low-effort comments used to inflate engagement. Given only one comment to analyze, confidence is limited. On the fakeness scale I assess a slightly above-even chance it could be non-organic (55/100) but with low confidence (35/100). For advertising feasibility, this comment alone provides weak evidence of a high-quality, engaged audience — it shows positive sentiment but no depth (no questions, no examples, no tagging, no conversion intent). Overall I rate the comment signal for ad suitability at 40/100 with low confidence (30/100). Recommended next steps before purchase: analyze a larger sample of comments for specificity and diversity, inspect commenter profiles for authenticity (real photos, follower/following ratios, activity), check overall engagement rate (comments, saves, shares) and reach/impression metrics from the influencer, and request audience demographics and recent campaign case studies. Without that additional data, reliance on these comments for ad-decisioning is not advised." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which lipstick is used; express admiration for the color (shows genuine interest and potential purchase intent)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct product question combined with a compliment. Its phrasing is specific (asks which lipstick) and expresses personal taste, which is typical of genuine follower engagement rather than generic bot/spam comments. The language contains minor grammatical errors consistent with a real user writing informally in German. Based on this one comment, engagement appears relevant to the promoted product and indicates purchase curiosity — a positive signal for advertising potential. However, this assessment is necessarily limited by the sample size of one comment. To increase confidence before an ad buy, review a larger set of comments for repetition, timing patterns, link-outs, commenter profiles (age, follower count, activity), like-to-comment ratio, and whether the influencer replies or converts inquiries into product links. Recommended next steps: analyze at least 50–100 comments, cross-check commenter accounts for authenticity, and compute engagement rate relative to follower count." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic compliment (short positive comment with emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive engagement / compliment to the creator or product; social proof that may increase perceived popularity but provides little substantive feedback." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Schöne Farbe 😍') is a short, generic positive remark likely from a follower or casual viewer. Such comments are common and low-effort: they signal some positive sentiment but carry little information about genuine interest, purchase intent, or audience quality. The comment could be authentic, but generic praise with an emoji is also the kind of content produced by low-effort bot farms or engagement pods, so there is moderate uncertainty. With only one comment available, this sample is insufficient to judge overall comment authenticity or the influencer's suitability for advertising. Recommended next steps: review a larger sample of comments (diversity, specificity, questions), check commenter profiles (real accounts vs. accounts with no posts/followers), examine engagement rate vs. follower count, and look for replies/conversation and time distribution of comments before making an advertising decision." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive thank-you / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses gratitude and appreciation for content (engagement/feedback). Likely intended to signal that the commenter found the tips useful and to encourage the creator." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️') is a brief, positive, personalized thank-you in German. Its wording and inclusion of the influencer's name and an emoji make it more consistent with genuine follower feedback than with obvious bot/generic spam; therefore fakeness is assessed low. However, this is only one data point — insufficient to judge overall audience authenticity or engagement quality for advertising decisions. Recommend analyzing a larger sample: comment diversity, commenter profiles (followers, activity), like-to-comment ratios, temporal patterns, repeated/generic comments, and follower growth before concluding purchase feasibility." }

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": 70, "overall_score": 80, "overall_confidence": 65, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment + inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the creator's manicure and request practical information about hand care (shows genuine interest and invites further content/engagement)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a positive, specific compliment ("Deine manicure ist so schön") paired with a request for actionable content about hand care. Specific references to the manicure and hands (rather than generic praise or emojis) reduce the likelihood it is fake; it reads like a real follower interested in beauty routines or products. This kind of comment is valuable for advertising assessment: it signals topic-relevant audience interest and an openness to product or routine recommendations (good for beauty/handcare sponsorships). Caveat: assessment is based on one comment only, so broader comment-set analysis could change the conclusion." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which eyeshadow is used and compliment the color — indicates interest in the product and positive sentiment toward the creator." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct product question combined with positive feedback (\"Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍\"). This pattern typically reflects a genuine follower interested in the makeup item, rather than a generic promotional bot. Fakeness risk is low but not zero (score 10) because short, single-language comments can sometimes be copied or mass-posted; confidence is relatively high given the personalized question and emoji. Overall ad-feasibility is moderately high (65) based on visible interest in the product, but confidence is limited (50) because this analysis covers only one comment. Recommendation: evaluate a larger sample of recent comments, overall engagement rate (likes/comments per follower), follower authenticity, comment timing, and diversity of commenters before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Genuine user question/observation", "count": 1, "purpose": "User asks whether the influencer's lips are over-lined/over-painted — expresses curiosity about appearance and makeup technique; indicates engaged, content-specific attention rather than generic praise or promotional language." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided ('Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?') reads as a genuine, content-specific question about the influencer's makeup rather than a generic, self-promotional or bot-like message. It is short, context-aware and not formulaic (no repeated phrases, emojis-only, or product links). Based on this one comment alone there is a low likelihood of it being fake (fakeness_score 10), but confidence is limited because one comment is insufficient to judge overall audience authenticity. For an advertising feasibility decision, this comment is mildly positive: it demonstrates that at least some followers pay attention to the influencer's appearance and engage with substantive questions. However, a reliable assessment requires more data: comment volume and diversity, timing patterns, commenter account quality (age, followers, posting behavior), repetition or copy-paste comments, like-to-comment ratios, and whether comments come from likely bots or real users. With only this comment, give moderate consideration to the account but request a fuller comment sample and account-level metrics before final purchase decisions." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/affection or lightweight engagement. Low informativeness — can be genuine follower engagement, participation in engagement pods, or automated/bot activity." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment consisting of a heart emoji was provided. Emoji-only comments are common and ambiguous: they often indicate casual positive engagement from real followers but are also frequently produced by bots or coordinated engagement (pods) because they are low-effort. With a single data point there is insufficient evidence to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. The fakeness score is set near neutral due to this ambiguity and low sample size; confidence is low. For advertising-feasibility decisions, comment content and volume are only one signal. Recommended further checks before purchasing ads: volume and variety of comments, timing patterns (many comments posted in short bursts), commenter account quality (real profiles vs recently created or low-following accounts), like-to-comment ratio, follower growth history, and engagement on other posts. Based on the available comment alone, the risk of inauthentic engagement is uncertain and I would not rely on this as a positive signal for ad purchase without additional data." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the influencer's appearance to show admiration and reinforce social proof." }, { "type": "Relatable / self-deprecating personal comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Follower compares themselves to the influencer, expressing insecurity to create a personal connection and relatability." }, { "type": "Emoji-based engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Use of emojis (😂, 😍) to add emotional tone, friendliness and informal engagement." }, { "type": "Organic / non-promotional", "count": 1, "purpose": "Comment contains no promotional language, links, or generic marketing phrases—likely genuine audience interaction." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as a genuine, engaged follower: it contains a specific, personal phrasing (self-deprecating comparison), natural grammar and emojis, and no promotional content—features that lower the likelihood of it being fake. It functions primarily as a compliment and a relatability signal rather than a call-to-action or branded endorsement. However, a single comment is weak evidence: to judge influencer suitability for advertising, you need volume and diversity of comments, engagement rate, commenter account quality, comment repetitiveness, and temporal patterns. Based on this lone comment the comments section shows positive, organic-feeling engagement but provides insufficient data to strongly recommend purchase. I estimate a low probability this comment is fake (fakeness_score 12, confidence 80). Overall suitability for advertising from the comment sample alone is modest (overall_score 45, confidence 40)—positive tone but insufficient sample size; request more comments and broader engagement metrics before a buy decision." }

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": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "organic feedback / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "asking for advice / expressing confusion about technique or appearance" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is likely authentic: it's specific, context-dependent, and phrased as a personal observation and question rather than generic praise or a short promotional line. It contains nuance (mentions viewing 'up close' and 'painting further out') and asks whether the commenter is doing something wrong, which indicates genuine engagement and interest. There are no typical bot signals (repetitive emojis, irrelevant links, generic compliments). Limitations: this is only one comment — conclusions about the audience or influencer reliability for advertising purchases need more data (volume of comments, variety, timing, follower quality, likes-to-comments ratio, and other comments' patterns). Based on this sample, the audience appears engaged and potentially valuable for ads that rely on real user feedback, but a larger comment set and account-level metrics are required for a confident advertising decision." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short single-phrase compliment (German: \"Volle Lippen\")", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise/positive reaction to appearance; lightweight engagement (no CTA, no brand mention)" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: a short, language-specific compliment ('Volle Lippen' = 'full lips'). This is a low-information signal — plausible as a genuine, spontaneous compliment but also typical of low-effort bot or engagement-farming comments. There is no indication of product interest, purchase intent, or meaningful conversation. Given the paucity of comments and lack of diversity or context, confidence in judging authenticity is limited. For advertising-feasibility decisions, comment data here is insufficient and weak: it neither demonstrates an engaged, relevant audience nor indicates inauthentic behavior conclusively. Recommended next steps: inspect commenter account(s) (age, follower/following ratio, posting history), review full comment set and timestamps for repetition/patterns, check ratios of likes-to-followers and story interactions, and evaluate comment diversity and conversational depth before making a purchase decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive endorsement / generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement and appreciation for the post; signal intent to follow the influencer's advice; increase visible engagement and social proof. Could also be used as low-effort bot/comment-farm text." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.\" This reads as a short, positive endorsement and contains no personal detail or interaction-specific information. Features raising suspicion: slightly awkward phrasing (missing subject, minor grammar choices), absolutist language ('niemals'), and a definite pledge to always follow the influencer's tips — all common in templated or auto-generated praise. Features suggesting genuine origin: topic-specific content (mentions 'schmale Lippen' — narrow lips), which matches a beauty-related post and would be a natural reaction from a follower. Given the limited sample (one comment), the fakeness assessment is necessarily tentative. I rate the comment as slightly more likely to be inauthentic (fakeness_score 60) but with moderate uncertainty (confidence 50). For advertising feasibility: this single comment offers weak evidence of authentic, engaged followers. Overall suitability score is below neutral (45) with moderate-low confidence (40). Recommendation: before purchasing advertising or partnering, analyze a larger set of comments and commenters (check commenter account ages, follower counts, diversity of comment content, timestamps for burst patterns), verify overall engagement rate versus follower count, and look for repeated, templated comments across multiple posts which would increase the likelihood of fake engagement." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product/service interest/inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "User requests specific content/service (a 'business makeup for photoshoot'), indicating genuine interest and a potential customer intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a specific, contextual request and includes a positive emoji, which suggests a genuine user interested in makeup content for photoshoots rather than a generic or spammy reply. Fakeness likelihood is low based on wording and specificity, but confidence is moderate because this assessment is based on one comment only. For advertising feasibility: this comment is a positive signal for makeup or beauty brands (shows content demand), but the sample size is too small to judge overall audience quality or engagement authenticity. I recommend analyzing a larger set of comments, engagement rates (likes/comments per follower), comment timestamps (to detect bursts), and follower profiles before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/enthusiasm and provide surface-level engagement (social proof)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍\" is a short, enthusiastic praise in German with an emoji. This pattern is common for genuine fans but is also easily produced by bots or copy-paste responders, so I assign a moderate-low fakeness risk (30/100) with medium confidence. As a single, generic positive remark it offers little evidence of meaningful audience quality or purchase intent; it boosts apparent popularity but does not indicate deep engagement, trust, or conversion potential. For a reliable advertising decision you need more data: volume and diversity of comments, commenter profile(s), like-to-comment ratio, timing/repetition patterns, and whether comments include specifics or questions. With only this comment, the overall suitability for ad spend is low-to-moderate (40/100) with medium confidence." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Inquiry/Question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking where the products are sold — expresses purchase interest or intent to buy; seeks product/availability information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment appears genuine: a polite, specific question in German asking where the products are available, with supporting emoji that suggest real user interest rather than automated text. As a signal for ad-buy feasibility, this is positive (shows potential purchase intent) but is only one data point. Reliability is low without more comments, engagement metrics, and follower-quality checks. Recommend reviewing a larger sample of recent comments, engagement rate, follower authenticity (e.g., follower growth, likes per post), and diversity of comment types before making an advertising decision." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive/compliment (emoji-rich)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express praise and emotional approval; increase visible engagement and social validation." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided ('👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön') is a short, emoji-heavy compliment in German ('very beautiful'). It functions as simple positive engagement — likely from a follower who liked the post but provides no specific detail about content, product, or intent to purchase. Such generic praise can be genuine casual engagement, but the lack of specificity and low effort also matches typical bot/engagement-pod comments. With only one comment, any authenticity or quality judgment is highly uncertain. For an advertising decision you need more data: total comment volume, comment diversity, commenter profile checks (real follower counts, history, language consistency), repetition patterns across posts, timing of comments, and like-to-comment ratios. Based on this single example I rate the comment's fakeness as moderately low (30/100) but with limited confidence (40/100), and the overall advertising-feasibility based on comments alone as low (30/100) with modest confidence (35/100). Recommendation: gather a larger sample of comments and profile metadata before deciding on ad spend." }

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": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 80, "overall_confidence": 70, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used — indicates purchase intent or desire to replicate the look." }, { "type": "Compliment / positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praising the warm coral tones — signals genuine appreciation and positive sentiment toward the creator/content." }, { "type": "Engagement-driving (call-to-action)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Direct request that encourages the influencer to respond, increasing visible engagement and potential conversion." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as authentic: it is specific (asks which palette), polite, includes an emoji/prayer hands and thanks, and contains both praise and a direct product question. Those features are typical of real followers seeking product information or intending to purchase. There are no signs of generic bot language, link-spam, or mass-promotion patterns. As a signal for ad-buy feasibility, this is positive — product inquiries indicate an engaged, conversion-ready audience. However, this assessment is based on one comment only. To make a robust media-buy decision you should inspect a larger sample of comments (diversity of commenters, frequency of similar product-asking comments), the influencer's response rate, overall engagement rate relative to follower count, audience demographics, and follower authenticity metrics (fake/farm accounts). Recommendation: treat this comment as a favorable micro-signal but require broader comment and account analysis before final purchase." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express dissatisfaction/critique (points out that the post is not subtle/authentic)" } ], "interpretation": "Single short German comment \"Dezent ist anders\" (\"This is not subtle\") conveys a negative, critical reaction questioning subtlety or authenticity. It appears organic (colloquial phrasing, language match) rather than bot-like or promotional, so fakeness is low. However, this is only a single data point — insufficient to draw strong conclusions about the overall comment authenticity or audience sentiment. For ad-buy decisions, treat this as a signal that at least some viewers perceive the content as overt or inauthentic; recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments, engagement rates, follower quality, and sentiment distribution before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "User asks which products are used — indicates product interest, possible purchase intent and genuine engagement (includes brief greeting)." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment: \"Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.\" is a natural, well-formed German question that combines a greeting with a direct product inquiry. It reads like genuine audience interest rather than a generic bot or spam message (no promotional links, no emojis-only pattern, correct language). Fakeness assessed low (10/100) with moderate-high confidence because one comment is a small sample and bots can mimic questions but there are no strong signals of inauthenticity. For advertising feasibility: this single comment shows potential for product-related engagement and intent, but it is insufficient alone to conclude the influencer’s audience quality. Recommend reviewing volume of similar comments, follower-to-engagement ratios, comment diversity, conversation depth, and historical conversion metrics before purchasing ads or partnerships. Overall suitability based on this comment alone is neutral (50/100) with moderate confidence; more data required for a reliable decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express an aesthetic critique of the influencer's appearance (specifically eyebrow placement); indicates personal opinion and audience engagement rather than promotion or spam." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....') is a direct, negative aesthetic critique and reads as organic audience feedback rather than a bot/spam message. It serves the purpose of honest viewer opinion and signals that followers feel comfortable posting candid reactions. From an advertising-feasibility perspective, one negative comment alone is not disqualifying — it can indicate authentic engagement, which is valuable to advertisers. However, the analysis is very limited because only one comment was provided. To make a robust decision, examine a larger sample of comments for sentiment distribution, recurring themes, reply behavior, like-to-comment ratios, and follower quality. Based on this single comment, I assign a low fakeness likelihood and a moderate overall suitability for advertising (quality depends on broader context and brand fit)." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Seeks information about product performance (coverage of pores); indicates user interest and possible skepticism." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, \"Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?\", is a natural-language product question in German. It reads as genuine user engagement (seeking details about how the product covers pores) rather than a short generic praise or promotional bot message. Tone is mildly skeptical/curious, which is useful for authentic engagement. However, this is only one comment — the sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall authenticity of the account's comment stream or suitability for advertising. Recommendation: collect a larger sample of comments, timing of comments, commenter profiles (follower counts, activity), like-to-comment ratios, and other engagement metrics before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "question/information request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking what products are shown — indicates curiosity and potential purchase intent from a follower or viewer." } ], "interpretation": "There is only one comment available: a natural German-language question ('Was sind das für Produkte?') asking what products are shown. This looks genuine (no emojis, no promotional language, proper grammar) and signals interest from a viewer, which is positive for advertising potential. However, a single neutral question is insufficient to assess overall audience quality or engagement authenticity. The low fakeness score reflects that the comment does not show common fake/bot markers, but confidence is limited by the tiny sample size. For a reliable buy/no-buy decision, request more data: full comment sample, timestamps, like counts, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), comment diversity (languages, sentiment), and engagement rates. Additional checks: repeated identical comments, high ratio of one-word praise, many comments from new accounts, and comment timing patterns — these would raise fakeness. Based on this single comment alone the post shows minimal organic interest but not enough evidence to confidently recommend ad spend." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/affection and provide lightweight engagement (likes/support); primarily an algorithmic engagement signal rather than substantive interaction." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: three heart emojis. Emoji-only comments are common and ambiguous — they often come from genuine followers expressing appreciation, but are also frequently produced by low-effort accounts or engagement farms. The comment provides no product-specific feedback, no questions, and no indicators of audience intent or purchasing behavior. For influencer advertising feasibility this is weak evidence of meaningful or authentic audience engagement. The low volume and low informational content of comments reduce confidence in the audience's responsiveness to advertising. Recommendation: obtain a larger sample of comments, audience demographics, and engagement ratios (likes vs comments, comment diversity and timestamps) before making a buy decision." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive engagement / short praise without detail — boosts visible engagement but provides little signal about genuine interest" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Richtig schön\" (German for \"Really/very beautiful\"). It's a short, generic positive remark. Such comments can be genuine (a follower expressing approval) or low-effort/automated engagement; the brevity and lack of contextual detail reduce its informational value. With only one short comment, there is insufficient evidence to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising purchase decisions, this is weak input — recommend collecting the full comment set, examining commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), diversity and specificity of comments across multiple posts, timing patterns, and overall engagement rate before making a decision." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction (fire 🔥)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Quick positive reaction / approval or enthusiasm; serves to boost visible engagement but conveys no substantive feedback." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided and it consists solely of three fire emojis. Emoji-only comments are common and can be genuine quick reactions from real followers, but they are also trivial to fabricate or leave en masse by bots or low-effort accounts. With one short emoji comment there is very little signal about audience quality, sentiment depth, or authenticity. The relatively low fakeness score (25) reflects that emoji reactions are often real, while the low confidence (30) reflects inadequate data to be confident. The overall suitability for an ad buy is rated low (35) with low confidence (25) because a single emoji comment does not demonstrate meaningful, targeted engagement or an engaged, authentic community. Recommendation: before making advertising decisions, obtain the full comment set, commenter account metadata (follower counts, account age, profile completeness), like-to-follower ratio, comment diversity, temporal patterns, and recurring commenter identities. Use those data points or an influencer-audit tool to better judge authenticity and ad-fit." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "defensive/topic-corrective", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defends the creator against criticism (mentions 'Botox') and redirects conversation back to the post's subject (makeup technique)." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment is a reactive, human-seeming reply that rebuts a perceived personal attack and refocuses on content. Tone is defensive/supportive of the creator and topical (about makeup technique), suggesting an engaged follower rather than a generic promotional bot. With only one comment, there is insufficient data to judge broader audience authenticity or engagement patterns. For advertising decisions, this comment is mildly positive for content relevancy but does not demonstrate volume, diversity, or sustained positive engagement; recommend analyzing more comments, comment timestamps, user profiles, and like-to-follower ratios before purchase." }

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": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 52, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Transformation praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses positive reaction to a before/after transformation (praises appearance, notes specific factors like hairstyle and clothing). Serves as social proof, encourages engagement and reinforces the influencer's perceived effectiveness." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a positive, somewhat specific compliment about a visible transformation (mentions hairstyle and clothing as contributing factors, then highlights that the person looks more awake, fresh and youthful). Its wording is natural, includes nuance and an emoji, and is not a short generic template (e.g., 'Amazing!' or repetitive marketing copy), so it appears likely genuine rather than clearly manufactured. However, this is only one comment — sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising decisions, this isolated positive remark is mildly encouraging (shows at least some authentic positive reactions), but you should review a larger set of comments, comment-to-like ratio, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), and repetition patterns across posts before committing ad spend. Recommended next steps: collect 50–200 recent comments, check for repeated phrases or accounts, and analyze engagement rates and follower authenticity." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive/compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval and positive sentiment; simple engagement to boost visible interaction (likes/replies)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment is available: \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" (\"Looks great\"). This is a generic positive compliment with emojis. Such comments provide some surface-level engagement but very little informational value about genuine interest, purchase intent, or audience quality. The comment could be from a real follower offering casual praise or from engagement tactics (pods/bot-generated generic comments); there is insufficient context (no commenter account data, frequency patterns, diversity of comments, timestamps, or replies) to be confident either way. For advertising decisions, this single comment is weak evidence: it suggests normal positive sentiment but does not demonstrate engaged, persuasive, or actionable audience behavior. Recommend collecting more comments, commenter profiles, like-to-comment ratios, and temporal patterns before committing to ad spend." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short generic praise / emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reaction / low-effort engagement — expresses admiration but provides no substantive feedback; can serve to boost visible engagement metrics." } ], "interpretation": "The lone comment 'Wow 😍' signals positive sentiment but is extremely short and non-specific. Such comments are common both from genuine casual followers and from automated/low-effort accounts used to inflate engagement. With only one comment provided, there is insufficient evidence to confidently judge audience authenticity or campaign suitability. Recommendation: review more comments across multiple posts, inspect commenter profiles (age, activity, follower/following ratios), check comment timing patterns and like-to-comment ratios, and request the influencer's audience analytics before making any advertising purchase decisions." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 70, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "user_mention/tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "Tagging another account (likely to draw that person's attention, spammy referral, or simple 'look at this' tag). Low-information engagement; often produced by users tagging friends or by automated/bot accounts to create visible interaction." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided and it is a bare account mention (@rukiyevizercimen). Mention-only comments are low-effort and frequently used either by real users tagging friends or by automated/spam accounts to generate visible activity. With this single data point there is insufficient evidence of genuine, meaningful engagement (no conversational content, praise, question, or product-specific feedback). Consequently the comment appears more likely to be low-quality engagement (hence a moderately high fakeness score) but confidence is limited because a single tag can be genuine. For advertising feasibility, this sample suggests weak comment-driven social proof: recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments and other signals before buying advertising (check commenter profiles, comment timestamps and patterns, ratio of substantive comments to tags/emoji, follower-to-engagement ratios, and reposts)." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive gratitude / emoji-rich", "count": 1, "purpose": "express appreciation / boost visible engagement (short, supportive fan/follower response); low informational value" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍\" is a short, emoji-heavy expression of gratitude in German. This pattern is common for genuine followers responding positively (thank-you + affectionate emojis). It contains no promotional language, no links, and no generic marketing buzzwords that commonly mark bot or paid comments. However, it is low-effort and provides little signal about audience quality or purchase intent. Given the single-sample input, the risk it is inauthentic is low-to-moderate (scored 20) but the confidence is limited because one comment is insufficient to characterize the account's overall engagement. For advertising feasibility this single comment is not decisive: it suggests a positive tone among at least some audience members, but you should evaluate additional factors — volume and diversity of comments, comment timing, commenter account authenticity, consistent engagement rate, follower demographics, and recurring patterns of generic praise — before making a buying decision." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "agreement/supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses agreement with the post's message and provides mild endorsement; likely intended as interpersonal validation rather than promotion." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short German comment was provided: \"Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr\" (\"Right ... and less is often more\"). The language and brevity are natural, there are no promotional links, emojis, or repetitious phrasing typical of bots or paid comments, so the individual comment appears likely genuine (low fakeness). However, with only one comment available there is very limited signal about overall audience quality or engagement levels. For advertising purchase decisions this is weak evidence: positive but minimal engagement. Recommended next steps before buying advertising: review total comment volume, like counts, follower count and growth, typical engagement rate, comment diversity (many unique commenters vs. repeats), timing patterns, and look for other signs of inorganic activity (duplicate comments, generic praise across posts, follower quality). Based on the single comment, I assign a low fakeness risk but a below-average suitability score for advertising due to insufficient engagement data." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Brief positive reaction / applause; raises visible engagement but carries little informative value about genuine interest or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it consists of four clapping-hands emojis. This is a generic, low-information engagement signal: it increases visible comment count and shows positive sentiment but does not indicate depth of interest, product knowledge, or intent to act. Emoji-only comments are common from genuine followers as quick reactions but are also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort accounts. Given the brevity and generic nature, I assign a modestly elevated likelihood of inauthenticity (fakeness_score 55) but with low confidence because a single emoji is ambiguous. Overall, the comment quality is low for evaluating advertising fit (overall_score 30). Recommendation: analyze a larger sample of comments, examine commenter account profiles (age, follower/following ratios, posting history), comment timestamps, and like-to-comment ratios to better judge authenticity and audience quality before purchasing ad or influencer placement." }

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": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses admiration for the subject's makeup/apply technique and engages emotionally (use of emoji)." }, { "type": "Personal anecdote / conversational", "count": 1, "purpose": "Shares a personal feeling (shyness about approaching) to build rapport and authenticity." }, { "type": "Product recommendation / brand mention", "count": 1, "purpose": "Recommends and tags a specific product (@ohganicals) as a tip for makeup removal—potentially driving attention to that brand." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads plausibly authentic: it contains a personal reaction, an emotional nuance (emoji, hesitation) and a specific product detail rather than generic praise. The tagged brand could be an organic recommendation or a subtle promotional mention; there are no overt bot signs (no links, no repetitive copy-paste phrasing). Fakeness risk is low-to-moderate (estimated 20/100) but not negligible because brand-tagging can be incentivized. For influencer-ad feasibility this is a mildly positive signal—it shows some real user engagement and organic brand interest—but a single comment is insufficient to judge overall audience quality. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments for patterns, check the commenter’s profile for authenticity and posting behavior, and look for repeated brand mentions or identical phrasing across comments that would indicate paid or inauthentic activity." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive/Complimentary", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement and praise; provides social proof and signals interest in makeup-related content, encouraging influencer credibility and engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏') is a short, topical, and positive endorsement of the post's message about makeup. Language and emoji use appear natural and context-relevant rather than templated or spammy, so likelihood of it being fake is low (fakeness score 10). However, analysis is severely limited by having only one comment: this gives a weak signal about overall audience quality, engagement depth, or authenticity. For advertising purchase decisions, this single positive remark is a small favorable indicator (hence an overall score of 60) but insufficient on its own. Recommend evaluating a larger sample of comments, like-to-follower ratio, comment diversity, timing patterns, follower authenticity, and audience demographics before concluding campaign feasibility." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short_positive_praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express brief approval/positive reaction (low-effort engagement; signals appreciation but provides no detail or intent to engage further)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: \"Супер 👍\" (\"Super 👍\"). This is a generic, positive, low-effort comment. Such comments can be genuine quick reactions from real followers, but they are also commonly produced by bots or engagement pods. Because it’s a single, short praise with no contextual detail, its evidential value for assessing audience quality is limited. Fakeness score is moderate-low (30) because short praise leans slightly toward organic but remains ambiguous. Confidence in that fakeness estimate is moderate (60) due to lack of additional comments, commenter profiles, timing, and volume data. For advertising purchase feasibility, this single comment provides weak support: it indicates at least some positive reception but not enough to judge engagement quality, authenticity, or conversion potential. Overall feasibility score is therefore cautious (45) with low-medium confidence (40). Recommendation: before buying ads, analyze more data — number and diversity of comments, ratio of meaningful comments to generic ones, commenter account quality (profiles, follower counts, posting history), like-to-comment ratios, growth patterns, and engagement timing — to better assess authenticity and audience fit." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Support", "count": 1, "purpose": "Выражение восхищения и поддержки (личный/фанатский комплимент), повышает видимую вовлечённость, но не даёт доказательной ценности для рекламной эффективности." } ], "interpretation": "Один краткий комментарий на русском («Инночка, красотка» с эмодзи) выглядит как персональный комплимент — скорее от подписчика или знакомого. Стиль (уменьшительное имя + эмодзи) снижает вероятность массового бот-спама, поэтому уровень «фейка» низкий. Однако это единичный, поверхностный комментарий: недостаточно данных, чтобы судить о качестве аудитории или реальной вовлечённости (глубина взаимодействия, повторяемость, профиль комментаторов неизвестны). Рекомендации: проверить профиль комментатора(ов), распределение комментариев по постам, соотношение лайков/комментариев, временные шаблоны и разнообразие текста, чтобы принять решение по закупке рекламы." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (applause)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/encouragement; low informational value. Often used as lightweight positive engagement by real followers but is also commonly produced by bots/engagement farms." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: two clapping-hand emojis. Emoji-only comments are low-effort and provide little signal of genuine, high-quality engagement. Because such comments are frequently used both by real followers (quick praise) and by automated/generic accounts, I assign a moderate-to-high fakeness score (60) but with limited confidence (40) due to the extremely small sample. For advertising-feasibility I rate the comment-side signal low (30) with low confidence (35) — this single comment does not demonstrate meaningful conversation, product interest, or an engaged community. Recommended next steps before a buying decision: collect a larger sample of comments, inspect commenter profiles for authenticity (follower counts, posting history, profile photos, usernames), check temporal patterns (many similar comments posted in short windows), evaluate like-to-follower ratio, and look for substantive comments and question/answer threads which better indicate genuine engagement." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 8, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine inquiry / engaged follower", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks about event timing and directions (shows intent to attend or engage; seeks practical information)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is written in natural, colloquial German and asks a specific, context-dependent question (“Isn't it today? If yes, how do I get there?”). That pattern strongly indicates a real person interested in attending or interacting rather than a generic promotional or bot comment. Fakeness is assessed low (8/100) with relatively high confidence because the content is specific and interactive. However, this is only one comment — the sample size is too small to draw robust conclusions about the overall audience authenticity or influencer quality. For advertising-feasibility: this comment is a positive signal (real engagement and intent), but more data is needed (multiple posts, comment diversity, commenter account checks, like-to-comment ratios, audience demographics) before making a buy decision. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of recent comments, inspect commenter profiles for authenticity, and request the influencer’s engagement metrics and audience insights." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express praise/approval (positive reaction) and/or provide low-effort engagement to boost visibility; such comments can come from real followers, engagement pods, or low-effort bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it consists of three flame emojis (🔥🔥🔥). Emoji-only responses are ambiguous: they indicate a positive reaction but carry little information about genuine interest, purchase intent, or audience quality. Because the dataset is extremely small, this comment provides weak evidence either for or against authenticity. I rated fakeness slightly above neutral (55/100) because short emoji comments are commonly produced by both inorganic accounts and low-effort real followers; the confidence is low (40/100) due to the lack of additional comment context, commenter profile data, or engagement metrics. Overall suitability for advertising is low (30/100) with moderate-low confidence (45/100) because the comment provides minimal signal about audience relevance, engagement quality, or conversion potential. Recommendation: obtain more data — number and variety of comments, commenter profiles, engagement rate relative to follower count, recent post history, and presence of conversational comments — before making an advertising decision." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short positive praise (single word + emojis)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and signal engagement; increases visible positive sentiment but provides little informational value about genuine interest or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Unglaublich 👏👏👏\" (\"Incredible\" with clapping emojis). This is a low-effort, highly positive reaction that boosts surface-level engagement but does not convey detailed sentiment, intent, or credibility. Such short praise can be genuine from a casual follower or fan, but it is also a common format used by bot accounts or coordinated engagement because it is generic and reusable. Given the extremely small sample size, confidence in labeling this comment as fake or genuine is limited. For advertising buy decisions, this single data point is insufficient. Recommend analyzing a larger set of recent comments, commenter account quality (age, follower count, activity), repetition of similar comments, timestamp patterns, like-to-comment ratio, and audience demographics before making a purchase decision." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval and inflate visible engagement; low informational value for intent to purchase or meaningful endorsement." } ], "interpretation": "The only comment provided (\"🔥🔥🔥\") is an emoji-only, low-effort reaction. These comments commonly serve to signal enthusiasm or support but provide no detail about sentiment beyond positivity and add little evidence of genuine purchase intent. Emoji-only remarks are frequently produced by casual followers, fans, or automated/batch-engagement accounts, so they are moderately likely to be inauthentic. Given the single comment sample, confidence in any judgment is limited. For an advertising decision, this type of comment is weak evidence of a responsive, high-quality audience. I recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments for variety (questions, tagged friends, long-form praise, verified buyers), checking commenter account authenticity (profile completeness, follower counts, posting history), temporal patterns (sudden bursts), and overall engagement rate before concluding ad purchase feasibility." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "confirmation / acknowledgment (single-word)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short acknowledgment likely indicating the commenter completed an action (e.g., followed, entered a giveaway, performed a requested task) or is confirming receipt. Could also be used by low-effort real users or automated/batch accounts to simulate engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment ('Erledigt' — 'Done') is available, which strongly limits confident conclusions. The comment most plausibly serves as a task confirmation (giveaway/CTA response) or simple acknowledgment. Such one-word comments are ambiguous: if many identical comments appear from many accounts across posts, that pattern would indicate inorganic or incentivized behavior; as a lone instance it could easily be genuine. Given the lack of additional comments, commenter metadata, timestamps, repetition, or account quality, the fakeness assessment is deliberately conservative (mid-range). For advertising feasibility: this lone, low-effort comment is not strong evidence of authentic, meaningful engagement and warrants further checks before purchase decisions — examine comment volume and diversity across posts, repetition of identical replies, commenter account ages/follower ratios, likes on the comment, and overall engagement rate. Current overall suitability for ad spend is below neutral but uncertain; recommend collecting more comment samples and account-level signals before proceeding." }

Text: 🎉💚🎉🤗

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Generic positive/celebratory reaction to the post; increases engagement count but provides no substantive feedback or endorsement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"🎉💚🎉🤗\". This is a generic, emoji-only positive reaction. Such comments can be genuine (fans celebrating or showing affection) but are also commonly seen from low-effort accounts or automated engagement pods/bots. Given the sample size of one, there is insufficient evidence to strongly classify it as fake or real. The comment increases apparent engagement but offers no testimonial value, no product-specific endorsement, and no signal about audience quality. For an advertising purchase decision, this single emoji comment is weak evidence of authentic, persuasive audience interaction. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger set of comments across multiple posts, check commenter profiles for authenticity (account age, follower/following ratio, posting history), look for repeated identical comments across posts, review like counts and engagement rate, and examine timing patterns (bursts of comments)." }

Text: Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Personal praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and positive engagement; to flatter the influencer and signal support (may also aim to attract attention/get a reply)." } ], "interpretation": "Comment text (German): \"Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍\" — a short, direct compliment using the influencer's name and an emoji. Signals suggesting genuineness: personal address (name), natural phrasing, emoji use, no links or obvious spam templates. Possible reasons it could be inauthentic: single-sentence compliments are sometimes used by low-effort bot farms or fake accounts to appear engaged; without additional context (commenter profile, account age, activity patterns) this cannot be ruled out. Assessment: low likelihood of being fake but low confidence due to extremely limited data (only one comment). For advertising-feasibility decisions this single positive comment is insufficient — recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles, repetition of similar messages, overall engagement rate, follower quality, and whether comments come from target demographics before proceeding." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine organic reaction (humorous/confused)", "count": 1, "purpose": "engagement/entertainment — expresses amusement and confusion; signals the content attracted attention and repeat views without offering promotional intent" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Nice! Ich schau es mir eine Million mal an und raff es trotzdem nicht😂😂😂😂') reads as a natural, informal reaction in German: it uses colloquial phrasing and emojis, reports repeat viewing, and expresses amused confusion. That pattern is typical of real viewers engaging with puzzling or funny content rather than of generic bot-like comments (no stock phrases, no tags, no links). Given this, the comment's fakeness is low (score ~10) with moderate-high confidence. However, this is only one data point — you cannot assess overall audience quality, engagement authenticity, or suitability for advertising from a single comment. For influencer ad-purchase decisions you should examine volume and diversity of comments, commenter account quality, like-to-comment ratios, timing patterns, and presence of repetitive/templated comments. Based on this lone comment, the post appears to elicit genuine attention and repeat views (positive signal), but evidence is insufficient to rate the influencer highly for ad spend; overall suitability is therefore modest (overall score ~40) with low confidence." }

Text: Sehr schön und sehr einfach 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive generic compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/appreciation and provide lightweight engagement (positive social signal)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, “Sehr schön und sehr einfach 👏👏” is a short, generic positive compliment with emoji applause. Such comments commonly come from genuine followers, casual viewers, or low-effort engagement accounts (including bots or paid commenters). With only one comment provided, there is insufficient evidence to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising feasibility: this single positive remark is a weak signal — it indicates some positive reception but does not demonstrate engaged, specific, or qualified audience interest. Recommended next steps before purchase: analyze a larger sample of comments, inspect commenter profiles (real accounts, follower counts, posting history), check overall engagement rate on multiple posts, and look for thematic/specific comments that show true interest or purchase intent. Based on the lone comment, treat the post as low-confidence for ad spend." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive engagement / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses liking and intent to try the product/content; signals genuine interest and social approval, which supports reach and perceived credibility." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Sehr schön muss ich mal ausprobieren 😍💯👍❤️') reads as a natural, positive response in German with multiple emojis and a clear intent-to-try signal. It lacks hallmarks of bot-generated text (no repeated generic phrases, no links, natural grammar and emoji use), so overall fakeness is low. However, this is only one comment — conclusions about overall audience authenticity or influencer suitability are limited. For advertising decisions, this comment is mildly supportive (useful social proof) but insufficient alone: recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (real follower counts, account age, posting history), like-to-comment ratio, comment timing patterns, and presence of repetitive/generic comments across multiple posts to better assess engagement quality and fraud risk." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 75, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive interest / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses admiration and immediate intent to try the product/content (genuine user interest/potential conversion)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Oh sehr schön 😍 muss ich direkt mal ausprobieren ❤️\") reads as a natural, enthusiastic response: praise + explicit intent to try. The language, punctuation and emoji usage are typical of genuine followers rather than templated bot replies. Given only one comment, the sample is far too small to draw strong conclusions about overall audience authenticity or ad-readiness. For influencer ad-purchase decisions this comment is a positive signal (shows real interest and potential conversion), but you should confirm by analyzing a larger sample of recent comments, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), like-to-comment ratios, timing patterns, and overall engagement rates to detect coordinated or fake activity. Recommendations: gather 100+ comments, check for repeated phrases, evaluate commenter account age and follower/following ratios, and compute engagement vs. follower count before finalizing any advertising investment." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 75, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive endorsement / Kompliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Drückt Zustimmung und positive Wahrnehmung aus; erhöht soziale Bewährtheit (social proof)." }, { "type": "Absichtsbekundung / Conversion-Signal", "count": 1, "purpose": "Sagt, dass der Nutzer das Produkt ausprobieren will — potenzielles Kauf-/Testsignal." }, { "type": "Persönliche Ansprache / Beziehungsaufbau (Emojis)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Persönliche Anrede („liebe Ina“) und Emojis stärken die Wahrnehmung einer echten Follower‑Beziehung und authentischen Interaktion." } ], "interpretation": "Die einzelne Kommentarzeile wirkt natürlich und positiv: persönliche Anrede („liebe Ina“), konkrete Absicht („Werde es auf jeden Fall ausprobieren“) und lebhafte Emoji‑Nutzung passen zu einem echten Follower-Kommentar. Es gibt keine offensichtlichen Muster typischer Fake‑Kommentare (generische Lobformeln ohne Adressierung, übermäßig repetitiver Wortlaut oder Werbe‑/Hashtag‑Spam). Daher schätze ich die Fakeness‑Wahrscheinlichkeit gering (15). Gleichzeitig ist die Einschätzung nur auf einen Kommentar gestützt, deshalb moderate Sicherheit (60).\n\nFür die Werbeentscheidungsfindung: dieser Kommentar ist ein positives Signal (gutes Engagement, potenzielle Conversion), aber eine valide Kaufentscheidung erfordert größere Stichprobe und zusätzliche Checks: Verhältnis Kommentare/Followers, Kommentar‑Vielfalt, Profilprüfung der Kommentierenden (echte Accounts mit Inhalte/Interaktion), Konsistenz von Views/Likes/Kommentare, wiederkehrende Wortmuster oder Zeitpunkte (Hinweis auf Engagement Pods oder gekaufte Kommentare). Wenn mehrere Kommentare dieses Typs vorhanden sind und die Kommentierenden echte Profile zeigen, spricht das für eine gute Eignung der Influencerin für Werbung. Andernfalls sind weitergehende Prüfungen notwendig." }

Text: Ich werde es ausprobieren 🙌

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive_intent / engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses intent to try the product (conversion intent) and provides supportive engagement; functions as social proof." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Ich werde es ausprobieren 🙌') is short, positive and action‑oriented — the user states they will try the product and uses an emoji to show enthusiasm. That pattern typically suggests a genuine, interested follower rather than an obviously bot-like or promotional copy-paste comment. However, this is only one data point: you cannot generalize audience quality, engagement authenticity, or ad-buy suitability from one comment. For advertising feasibility you should review a larger sample of comments (variety, timing, account profiles), likes-to-comments ratio, follower authenticity, repeated or templated comments, and whether comments reflect real product knowledge or actual conversions. Based on this lone comment I rate fakeness low (10) but with moderate confidence; overall the comment provides mild positive signal but is insufficient for a strong recommendation to purchase advertising (overall score 45)." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "follower question / informational request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask the creator (Ina) for specific details about the colors she used — information-seeking, indicates genuine interest and possible intent to replicate or purchase." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct, specific request addressed to the creator asking for details about colors used. This is characteristic of an authentic follower who is engaged with the content and wants actionable information. It is not generic praise or a promotional/suspicious message, nor does it contain spammy language or links. However, this analysis is based on one comment only; that limits confidence about overall comment authenticity and audience quality. For advertising feasibility: this comment is a positive signal (engaged, relevant audience), but a single data point is insufficient to conclude whether the influencer's overall engagement is genuine or large enough to justify ad spend. Recommended next steps: review a larger sample of recent comments, look at comment-to-follower ratio, diversity of commenters, timing patterns, and presence of low-quality/templated replies to better assess fakeness and ad suitability." }

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": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive compliment / endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses praise for the technique to signal approval and social proof." }, { "type": "Technique/product-specific reference", "count": 1, "purpose": "Mentions specific tools (cotton swab and eyeshadow), indicating the commenter engaged with the content details." }, { "type": "Intent-to-try / conversion signal", "count": 1, "purpose": "States intention to try the method, a soft conversion signal useful for advertiser interest." }, { "type": "Emotive engagement (emojis)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Uses multiple emojis to convey enthusiasm and strengthen perceived authenticity." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment appears genuine and positive: it references specific details of the technique (cotton swab + eyeshadow), expresses clear intent to try, and uses multiple emojis — traits typical of real user engagement rather than generic bot replies. Fakeness risk is low but not zero (10) because a single comment is an insufficient sample and could be generated by an engaged spammer or incentivized user. Overall suitability for advertising is cautiously positive (55) — the comment shows real user interest and product-relevance, but one comment alone does not demonstrate broad authentic engagement. Confidence in the fakeness judgment is moderate-high (75) due to the specificity and natural language; confidence in the overall assessment is lower (45) because more data is needed. Recommended next steps before buying ad space: analyze a larger sample of comments, inspect commenter profiles (age, activity, follower patterns), check like-to-comment ratios across posts, look for repetitive phrasing indicating comment pods or bots, and review engagement timing to detect inorganic bursts." }

Text: Oh schön...das würde mich interessieren

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "expressed interest / positive engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "To show personal interest in the content and invite more information or follow-up (organic engagement)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short German comment was provided: \"Oh schön...das würde mich interessieren\" (\"Oh nice... I'd be interested in that\"). This is a low-information, natural-sounding reply that typically indicates genuine interest from a follower or casual viewer. It lacks stock phrases often seen in bot comments (no emojis repeated, no generic marketing lines), so the likelihood of it being fake is low but not zero — short comments can also be posted by low-effort engagement accounts or in engagement pods.\n\nGiven the single comment, there is insufficient evidence to judge the overall authenticity or commercial value of the influencer's audience. For advertising purchase decisions you should request more data: a larger sample of recent comments, temporal distribution, commenter accounts (followers, activity), likes vs. comments ratio, audience demographics, and whether comments show conversational depth or repeated accounts. Based solely on this comment, I assess low fakeness (score 15) but only moderate confidence, and I give low-to-moderate feasibility for ad purchase (overall score 30) with limited confidence. Additional comment and account-level data is required for a reliable recommendation." }

Text: Toll siehst du immer aus 🤩

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive praise (short, generic)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and support; provide social proof and increase visible engagement (algorithmic signal)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Toll siehst du immer aus 🤩\" (\"You always look great 🤩\"). It is a short, generic positive compliment with an emoji. Such comments are common from genuine followers, friends, or from engagement pods/bots; on its own this comment leans slightly toward being genuine because it implies familiarity ('immer' = 'always'), but it is also generic enough that it could be produced by coordinated or low-effort engagement. Given the single data point, confidence is limited. For advertising feasibility: this single positive comment is insufficient evidence of healthy, authentic audience engagement. Before purchasing ad/influencer placement, request more data — full comment sample across multiple posts, commenter account audits (real follower counts, activity, profile completeness), engagement rate (likes/comments vs follower count), comment diversity, timing patterns, and presence of product-relevant or purchase-intent comments. Based on current information alone I rate the comment set as low-to-moderate risk of being fake (fakeness_score 30) and the influencer suitability as borderline (overall_score 45). Recommended next steps: gather more comments, analyze commenter profiles for authenticity, compute engagement metrics, and look for comments that reference the product or show concrete intent." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/thank-you", "count": 1, "purpose": "express appreciation for content; simple engagement that signals approval and social proof" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Mega 🙌 danke 🙏🏾 für diese tollen Tips☺️\". It is a short, positive thank-you in German with multiple emojis, which reads as natural user feedback rather than a templated bot reply. Fakeness likelihood is low but not zero — single generic compliments are sometimes used by engagement farms, so I assign a modest fakeness score (15/100) with moderate confidence. Because the sample is extremely small (one comment), the ability to judge influencer authenticity or ad-readiness from comments alone is very limited. The comment is supportive and would register as social proof, but you should not base an advertising purchase decision on this single data point. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent comments for diversity of language and content, check commenter profiles for real-looking accounts (profile photos, posting history, follower counts), measure like-to-comment ratios, comment timing patterns, and compare to follower count to estimate organic engagement. Based on this single comment, overall suitability for advertising is uncertain — I score it 40/100 with moderate-low confidence; further comment-level and account-level analysis is required for a reliable decision." }

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic short praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses positive sentiment/approval with low informational content; often used by genuine followers as quick praise but also commonly generated by bots or engagement farms." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Sehr informativ\". This is a short, positive, generic remark that provides limited signal about genuine audience engagement. Such comments can be genuine low-effort reactions from real followers, or they can be part of automated/paid engagement because they contain no post-specific detail. Because the sample is a single comment, any fakeness judgment has low confidence. For advertising feasibility, this isolated comment is weak evidence: it shows some positive sentiment but not deep engagement or topic-specific interaction. Recommend analyzing a larger set of comments and additional signals before buying ads: variety and specificity of comments, comment-to-like ratio, timing patterns, commenter account quality (age, follower counts, posting history), replies from the influencer, and occurrence of repeated/generic phrases across multiple posts. If many comments are similarly generic and from low-quality accounts, consider the audience less authentic and reduce ad spend or request audience verification. If other comments show detailed, varied, and topical discussion from credible profiles, the post is more suitable for advertising." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (❤️)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Simple positive/affection signal — low-effort engagement intended to show support and increase visible engagement metrics" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it is an emoji-only heart. Emoji-only comments are low-information: they can be genuine quick reactions from real followers but are also commonly produced by bots, engagement pods, or mass-comment services. Given the absence of contextual data (commenter profile, comment timing, whether this pattern repeats across posts, total comment volume, likes, follower counts), authenticity cannot be determined with high confidence. For influencer advertising decisions this single heart is weak evidence of a genuinely engaged audience. I assign a moderate probability of inauthenticity (fakeness_score 60) with low-to-moderate confidence because the signal is ambiguous. Overall suitability for ad spend is low (overall_score 30) based on this limited, low-quality comment sample. Recommendation: perform a fuller audit — analyze many posts, unique commenter counts, comment depth and diversity, like-to-follower ratios, commenter account quality (age, follower counts, activity), and engagement timing — before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive praise / appreciative (generic)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation for content (encouragement/validation), increase visible engagement. Could be genuine follower feedback or a short generic compliment meant to boost engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍\" is a short, positive, emoji-rich endorsement in German that directly references the creator's 'tips'. That specificity (mentioning 'tips') leans toward a genuine appreciative follower rather than a completely random or irrelevant bot comment. However, the message is also a common, high-frequency phrasing used both by real fans and by engagement pods/bought-comment services, so it cannot be taken as strong proof of authentic engagement on its own. Confidence in fakeness assessment is low-to-moderate because only one comment is available. For advertising-purchase decisions this single comment is insufficient evidence: it indicates some positive sentiment but does not prove a real, engaged audience. Recommended next steps: audit a larger sample (50–200 recent comments), inspect commenter profiles (age, post history, followers, language consistency), check comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and overall engagement rate relative to follower count. If many comments show similar short/generic phrasing or originate from suspicious accounts, reduce trust and negotiation price; if comments are varied, specific, and from real-looking accounts, the influencer is more likely suitable for advertising." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry + compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks what lipstick/product is used, expresses positive sentiment about the color, indicates potential purchase interest and attempts to engage the poster for more product information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads naturally (German with minor grammatical errors typical of a non‑native speaker) and functions as both a compliment and a direct product inquiry — a useful sign of genuine interest from a potential customer. There are no obvious markers of inauthenticity (no copy‑paste phrasing, no generic emojis-only, no promotional links, not overly generic praise). Given the small sample (only one comment provided), the fakeness score is low (15) but not zero because isolated short comments can be fabricated or come from throwaway accounts. Overall suitability for advertising is modest (45): this comment indicates relevant audience interest, but a single genuine comment is insufficient to judge engagement quality or audience reach. Recommend reviewing more comments, commenter profile(s), comment timestamps, follower-to-engagement ratios, and comment diversity before purchasing advertising or forming a definitive conclusion." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Generic positive comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses appreciation/positive reaction to content (engagement and social proof)" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment ('Schöne Farbe 😍' — 'Nice color') is available. It is a short, positive, and generic compliment with an emoji, which typically serves to show engagement and reinforce social proof. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are also easy for bots or paid commenters to replicate; on its own it provides weak evidence either for authenticity or manipulation. Given the single data point, the assessed fakeness is relatively low (25) but with moderate uncertainty (confidence 60). For advertising-purchase decisions this sample is insufficient: overall feasibility is rated neutral-to-low (45) with low confidence (30). To improve assessment, request a larger comment sample and examine commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history), diversity of comment content, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratio, and overall engagement rate across multiple posts." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Appreciation/Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express gratitude and positive sentiment toward the influencer's tips; signals follower engagement and endorsement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short, German-language thank-you (\"Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️\"), using the influencer's first name and an emoji. It reads like a genuine follower response (natural phrasing, minor grammatical slip consistent with casual typing). There is no clear sign of bot-like patterns (no generic marketing phrases, no links, no repeated templates). However, with only one comment provided, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising feasibility this isolated positive comment is encouraging but insufficient: low comment volume limits evidence of active, engaged audience. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger set of comments, look at commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history), comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and presence of repetitive/similar comments indicating purchased engagement. Based on the single comment, treat authenticity as likely genuine but proceed with further verification before making ad-buy decisions." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment + Content Request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the creator's manicure and request practical content (hand care tips). Signals positive engagement and intent to learn or buy related products." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is specific and contextually relevant (praising the manicure and asking about hand care), which is more consistent with a real follower than with generic bot spam. It serves both as positive social proof and an explicit content request, indicating audience interest in beauty/hand-care topics — a favorable signal for advertisers in nails, hand care, or beauty products. However, this assessment is limited by sample size (only one comment). To increase confidence before a purchase decision, evaluate comment volume, commenter account authenticity (profiles, posting history), timing patterns, likes on comments, and overall engagement rate across multiple posts." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow/product was used — indicates genuine interest and potential purchase intent." }, { "type": "Compliment / Positive engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the color with an emoji — signals positive sentiment and endorsement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍') appears authentic: it is a direct product question combined with a complimentary emoji, written naturally in German and not using generic or templated praise common in bot/spam comments. Fakeness is low (15) but confidence is moderate because this assessment is based on one isolated comment. For influencer advertising decisions this is a mildly positive signal — it shows audience interest in the product and positive sentiment (score 60) — but it is insufficient on its own. Recommend checking a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (age, follower count, activity), timing/patterns of comments, like-to-comment ratios, and whether similar questions appear repeatedly (which can indicate coordinated comments or an engaged niche audience)." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "question/critique", "count": 1, "purpose": "Follower asking for clarification / offering mild criticism about makeup (engagement about content authenticity/appearance)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?”) is a direct, content-specific question about the creator’s makeup. Its wording is natural, language-specific (German) and refers to a visual detail, so it reads as genuine user engagement rather than a generic spam or bot message. Sentiment is neutral-to-slightly critical (seeking clarification, possibly implying the look is overdone). However, this is only one data point — sample size is too small to draw robust conclusions about overall comment authenticity or community quality. For advertising purchase decisions this comment provides a small positive signal (real human attention and scrutiny) but insufficient evidence of broad authentic engagement or positive brand-safe sentiment. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of recent comments for patterns (variety, specificity, language consistency), check like:comment ratios and reply behavior, inspect follower growth and comment timing for rapid or repetitive patterns, and look for brand-related comments or conversions before relying on this account for ad spend." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_like", "count": 1, "purpose": "Low-effort positive engagement (express appreciation/like). Often used to signal approval without adding meaningful conversation; can boost visible engagement metrics but provides little audience insight." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: a heart emoji (\"❤️\"). This is a very thin signal. Emoji-only comments typically indicate casual or low-effort engagement and are common from real followers as well as automated/bot accounts. Given the minimal content and sample size, the chance the comment is fake is fairly low but non-negligible (estimated fakeness_score 20) because bots often use simple emojis as well. Confidence in that judgement is moderate due to extremely limited data (one comment). For advertising-purchase feasibility, this single emoji gives weak evidence of an engaged, valuable audience. The overall suitability score is low (30 of 100) with moderate confidence — more data is required: number and diversity of comments, comment depth, like-to-follower ratio, follower quality (account age, activity, follower overlap), and engagement consistency across posts. Recommended next steps before purchase: collect a larger sample of recent posts and comments, run follower/audience quality checks, examine comment timestamps and account profiles for patterns, and request influencer analytics (reach, impressions, demographics)." }

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": 70, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / praise with self-deprecating relatability", "count": 1, "purpose": "Give positive feedback to the influencer, express personal relatability/insecurity to create rapport and endorse the influencer's appearance." }, { "type": "engagement (emoji, informal tone)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Add emotional emphasis and friendly tone to the compliment; encourage interaction and signal positive sentiment." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a natural-sounding, informal compliment in German: the commenter jokes about their own lips and praises the influencer's look, using emojis to reinforce a positive tone. There are no clear hallmarks of a bot or paid/prompted promotional comment (no links, generic marketing phrases, repeated templates, or obvious spam). The content is specific (mentions makeup/lips) and expresses personal sentiment, which favors authenticity. However, this is only one comment—insufficient to judge the overall authenticity or engagement quality of the influencer's audience. For an advertising-purchase decision, this comment is a small positive signal (shows an engaged, relatable follower), but you should corroborate with broader metrics: number of comments per post, comment diversity, commenter account activity and follower counts, timing patterns, and likes on comments. Recommended next steps: sample more comments across recent posts, inspect commenter profiles for genuine behavior, and compute engagement rates relative to follower count." }

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": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "constructive_critique / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Seeks clarification and gives constructive feedback about a visible technique (asks whether they are doing something wrong). Signals genuine viewer confusion and invites a reply or tutorial-style explanation." }, { "type": "positive_praise", "count": 0, "purpose": "Compliments or affirmation of the creator's work (none present)." }, { "type": "generic_engagement (emoji/short)", "count": 0, "purpose": "Short comments or emojis that only boost metrics without substantive content (none present)." }, { "type": "spam / promotional / bot", "count": 0, "purpose": "Self-promotion, links, or generic bot-like text (none present)." }, { "type": "trolling / abusive", "count": 0, "purpose": "Hostile or insulting comments (none present)." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment is a specific, contextual question about the technique shown in the post (\"it looks weird up close when you paint further out — am I doing something wrong?\"). That specificity and the conversational phrasing make it likely authentic rather than bot/spam. As a piece of influencer analysis: it indicates meaningful audience engagement — a follower is paying attention to details and is motivated to ask for help or clarification. For advertising feasibility this is a positive sign because it suggests the influencer sparks thoughtful responses and could drive interaction with branded content, but a single comment is a very limited sample. Recommended: evaluate volume and diversity of comments, like-to-comment ratio, reply behavior from the influencer, and other posts' comment patterns before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "brief/generic compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive sentiment / appearance praise. Could be a genuine quick compliment from a follower or a generic one-word comment typical of low-effort engagement (including bots or purchased comments) meant to boost visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: 'Volle Lippen' (German for 'full lips'). It is a short, one-phrase compliment focused on appearance. This style of comment is ambiguous — it can be an authentic quick reaction from a follower, but it is also common among automated or purchased comments due to its brevity and lack of contextual detail. Because the sample is extremely small, confidence in any judgment is limited. Recommendation: collect a larger sample of comments, check for repeated phrases and timing patterns, inspect commenter profiles for real activity and followers, and evaluate overall engagement rate on the post before making an advertising 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": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Show appreciation for the influencer's advice, provide social proof and signal follower loyalty/ongoing engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.”) reads as a positive, endorsing message: thanking the influencer, rejecting an aesthetic (narrow lips), and promising to follow their tips. Linguistically it is plausible as a real follower reaction but contains minor grammatical oddities and a very strong, absolute statement plus a blanket promise to always follow the influencer, which are patterns sometimes seen in templated or low-effort promotional comments. With only one comment to analyze, the evidence is limited. I assess a moderate chance (around 40%) that this comment is not fully organic (i.e., could be scripted or part of repetitive engagement), with medium confidence due to the small sample size. For advertising feasibility: the comment provides positive social proof but is insufficient alone to establish authentic, engaged audience. Recommend reviewing a larger set of comments and account-level signals (diversity of comment content, commenter account quality, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratio, repeated phrases across posts) before making a purchase decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "content request / topic suggestion", "count": 1, "purpose": "Follower asks for a specific content piece (business makeup for a photoshoot); expresses interest and positive sentiment—intended to engage the influencer and request a tutorial or post." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Ein Business MakeUp für Fotoshooting würde mich interessieren. 😍\" — \"I'd be interested in a business makeup for a photoshoot\") reads as a genuine, positive content request from a follower. The emoji reinforces authentic enthusiasm. Fakeness is low because the comment is specific, on-topic and not generic praise or promotional text typically associated with bots. However, one comment is an extremely small sample: you cannot reliably judge overall audience quality, engagement authenticity, or commercial value from this alone. For advertising feasibility this is a mildly positive signal—it indicates audience interest in makeup/photography content and potential relevance for beauty or photography advertisers—but more data is needed (number of comments, variety of comment types, like-to-follower ratio, follower profiles, timing patterns) to make a confident buy decision." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic praise / positive sentiment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses admiration and positive reaction (emotional endorsement). Functions mainly to boost visible engagement and social proof but contains no substantive product feedback or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment ('Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍') is a short, generic positive reaction with an emoji. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are also frequently produced by bots or engagement farms because they are nonspecific and low-effort. With only one comment available, there is low evidentiary power to determine authenticity; a 40/100 fakeness estimate reflects moderate suspicion but substantial uncertainty. For ad-buying decisions, the presence of short generic praise is only weak evidence of a highly engaged, authentic audience. Recommend examining a larger sample of comments for diversity of language, specificity (mentions of product/use), commenter profiles (real accounts vs. newly created/empty), timing patterns, and like-to-comment ratios before making a purchase decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "User asks where the products are available — expresses purchase intent and seeks purchase information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏') is a direct product-availability question in German with emojis and polite phrasing. This pattern strongly suggests a real user expressing purchase interest rather than a bot or generic promotional comment. Fakeness is assessed low (10) because the comment is specific, conversational, and action-oriented. However, this is only one data point: it cannot reliably indicate overall audience quality or authenticity by itself. For advertising decisions, this comment is a positive signal (shows potential buyer interest and appropriate-language audience), but you should perform a deeper audit — check commenter profiles, frequency of similar inquiries, distribution of comment types across posts, engagement rate vs. follower count, and timing patterns — before committing ad spend." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and provide lightweight engagement/social proof (short, positive feedback using emojis and a brief phrase)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: '👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön'. This is a generic, positive emoji-based praise that serves primarily as social proof and lightweight engagement. As a single example it is a weak signal: such comments are common both from genuine followers and from bots/engagement farms because they require no context and are easily automated. Fakeness estimate is moderate-to-low (30/100) but confidence is limited (40/100) due to the extremely small sample. Overall advertising-feasibility score is tentative and modest (40/100) with low confidence (30/100). Recommended next steps before any ad buy decision: analyze a larger sample of comments across recent posts, check commenter profiles for authenticity (account age, follower/following ratio, content), look for repetitive or identical comments across posts, check timing patterns (many comments within short window), and compute overall engagement rate and audience demographics. These checks will substantially increase assessment confidence." }

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": 85, "overall_score": 78, "overall_confidence": 70, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / genuine question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used for the look — seeking product information and likely intent to buy or replicate the makeup." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided appears organic and relevant: it is specific (asks which eyeshadow palette produced the warm coral tones), polite, and includes an emoji and thanks — characteristics typical of a real follower seeking product information. This indicates genuine interest in the creator's content and potential purchase intent, which is a positive signal for advertising/brand partnerships. Limitations: assessment is based on one comment only. For a reliable influencer feasibility decision, analyze a larger sample of comments, commenter account quality (profiles, activity, follower counts), engagement rates relative to follower count, repetition/generic phrasing across comments, timing patterns, and ratio of likes-to-comments. Recommended next steps: collect and analyze ~100 recent comments, spot-check commenter profiles for authenticity, and compare to average niche engagement benchmarks before final ad purchase." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "negative/critique", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express brief criticism — the commenter indicates the post is not 'dezent' (not subtle), implying it is too loud/obvious or inauthentic." } ], "interpretation": "Single-comment analysis: the comment 'Dezent ist anders' is a short, idiomatic German critique likely from an actual user reacting negatively to the tone/appearance of the post (saying it is not subtle). Linguistically it reads natural and context-specific, so fakeness is low. However, this is a single data point and cannot be generalized. For advertising-feasibility: one critical but natural comment does not preclude working with the influencer, but it signals the content may be perceived as too overt or unrefined by some followers. Recommended next steps before purchase: audit a larger sample of comments for sentiment patterns, check commenter account authenticity and diversity, review overall engagement rates and recent follower growth, and verify whether other comments are similarly critical or if there are many generic/praise comments (which can indicate inauthentic engagement)." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / genuine question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Information-seeking: the commenter asks which products the influencer uses (potential purchase intent or curiosity)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided ('Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.') is a straightforward, low-effort product inquiry in German. This type of comment typically indicates genuine interest from a follower or potential customer; it can also be seeded by generic bot accounts in product-related posts, but on its own it looks authentic. Given only one comment, there is very limited evidence to judge overall comment authenticity or the influencer's engagement quality. The low fakeness score reflects the comment's plain question format and lack of typical bot markers (spammy links, repeated emojis, nonsensical text), but confidence is moderate because context is missing (other comments, commenter profile, timing, reply patterns). For advertising feasibility: this single comment is mildly positive (shows interest) but insufficient to recommend ad spend. I recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments, the profiles of commenters (age, follower counts, activity), likes-to-comments ratio, reply behavior from the influencer, and look for repetitive/comment patterns that indicate inauthentic engagement before making a purchase decision." }

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": "negative/critical", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express personal criticism of appearance (eyebrows too high); likely unsolicited opinion or mild trolling" } ], "interpretation": "Single comment in German — \"Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....\" — is a straightforward negative critique about the subject's appearance. Linguistic characteristics (natural phrasing, punctuation/ellipses) and lack of promotional language suggest a genuine user opinion rather than a bot or paid comment. With only one data point, overall conclusions are highly uncertain. For advertising feasibility: a lone negative comment signals a potential reputation or brand-fit risk but is insufficient to disqualify the influencer. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample (20–100 recent comments), measure sentiment distribution, engagement rates (likes per follower, replies), prevalence of obvious bot patterns (repetitive phrasing, irrelevant links), and follower authenticity before making buy/no-buy decisions." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Seeks specific information about how the product conceals pores — indicates genuine user curiosity or mild skepticism about product claims." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct, context-specific question in German asking \"Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?\" (With what are the pores covered then?). It is not a generic compliment or spammy endorsement phrase, contains no promotional language or emojis typical of bot/fake comments, and aims to clarify product performance — all signals of an authentic audience member. Fakeness is therefore low (10/100) with fairly high confidence given the content of the message.\n\nCaveats: this analysis is based on one comment only. For reliable advertiser decision-making, review overall comment volume, ratio of questions vs. praise, engagement patterns (likes, replies), comment timestamps, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), and look for repeated/patterned messages across posts. A single genuine-looking question suggests some real interest, so the post shows moderate potential for advertising (overall score 70/100), but confidence is limited because the sample is minimal." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "question / information-seeking", "count": 1, "purpose": "User asks what products are shown — seeking clarification or product information; indicates genuine curiosity/interest." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: a direct, neutral question in German asking what products are pictured. This is consistent with authentic engagement (a potential customer wanting information) and not typical of automated or promotional bot comments. However, a single comment provides extremely limited evidence about the broader audience quality, engagement patterns, or prevalence of fake/bot activity. For advertising feasibility, this single data point is mildly positive (shows at least some real interest) but insufficient to make a confident buying decision. Recommend examining overall comment volume and diversity, like-to-comment ratio, follower quality (growth history, follower accounts), timing patterns, repeated identical comments, and presence of promotional/bot-like comments across multiple posts before committing to an ad buy." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive reaction / low-effort engagement. Could be genuine fan support or generic bot/spam engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment provided: three heart emojis (\"❤️❤️❤️\"). Emoji-only comments are common and ambiguous: they do indicate positive sentiment but carry very little information about audience quality or intent. Because such comments are frequently left by both real passive followers and by automated or low-effort engagement services, the single emoji comment raises a moderate suspicion of inauthenticity (fakeness_score 60) but this judgment has limited confidence without more data (fakeness_confidence 60).\n\nFor advertising feasibility: the available signal is weak. A feed of mainly emoji-only comments would suggest low-quality/low-signal engagement and would lower confidence in audience value; given only this single short comment I rate the comment-section usefulness for ad decisions as below average (overall_score 45, confidence 55). Recommended next steps before purchasing ad space: inspect a larger sample of comments for diversity and substance, check commenter profiles for real accounts (posting history, follower counts, avatars), examine timing patterns (comment bursts), and compare engagement rates to follower counts. These checks will materially improve certainty about authenticity and ad-worthiness." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation / positive reaction; signals basic engagement and social approval. Could be genuine fan praise or a low-effort bot/test comment intended to boost visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Single short comment 'Richtig schön' is a generic positive reaction. Such comments are common from real followers but are also frequently produced by bots or low-effort engagement services, so authenticity is ambiguous. Given only one comment, there is insufficient evidence to judge audience quality or organic engagement—key factors for ad buys. Recommendation: review more comments for variation (length, language, specificity), check commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, profile photos, posting history), analyze likes-to-followers ratio and timing patterns before deciding on advertising spend." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval and boost visible engagement; often low-effort and can come from genuine fans, casual users, or automated/bought-engagement services." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment consists of three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). This is a generic positive reaction that increases visible engagement but carries very little informational content about real audience interest or intent to purchase. Emoji-only comments are common among genuine fans but are also frequently produced by low-effort accounts or engagement farms, so there is moderate uncertainty about authenticity (hence a mid-level fakeness score). Because only one short, non-specific comment is available, you cannot reliably assess audience quality or campaign suitability from this alone. For advertising buy decisions, review more data points: diversity and substance of comments, commenter account profiles (age, activity, follower counts), engagement rate vs. follower count, comment timing patterns, and recurrence of identical short emoji comments across posts. Based on this single comment, influencer ad-feasibility is low-to-uncertain, pending broader engagement and audience-quality analysis." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Supportive / Defensive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defend subject against a perceived criticism (Botox); redirect discussion to the topic (makeup technique); signal alignment with poster" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a genuine defensive/supportive reaction: it rebuts an implied criticism about Botox and redirects the thread to makeup technique. Language and tone are natural and tied to the post content, not promotional or generic spam. Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility this is mildly positive (shows at least some engaged followers who care about content), but you should request a larger sample: total comment volume, likes per comment, timing patterns, variety of commenters, and follower authenticity metrics before deciding. Current assessment: low likelihood the comment is fake, but insufficient data to rate the comment section as a reliable indicator for ad purchase." }

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": 65, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the transformation, provide social proof and positive reinforcement; expresses aesthetic approval and engagement." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment is a descriptive, positive reaction in German noting a visible transformation and mentioning hairstyle and clothing as contributing factors. The presence of emoji, the specific observations (waker, fresher, more youthful), and lack of generic promotional phrasing suggest the comment is likely genuine (not a clear bot template or paid promotional line). However, this is only one data point — while it provides good qualitative signal (engaged follower noticing details), it is insufficient to judge overall engagement authenticity or to make a reliable advertising decision. For ad-feasibility you should analyze a larger sample: comment volume, variety of commenters, time distribution, commenter profiles (real accounts vs. obvious bots), repetition of phrases across posts, and like-to-comment ratios. Based on this single comment alone I rate the comment fakeness low (15/100) and the post's immediate suitability for advertising moderately positive (65/100), but with low-to-moderate confidence because of the very limited sample size." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive compliment / emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "express approval, boost visible engagement and social proof" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" is a short, positive compliment using emojis. This type of comment typically serves to show approval and increase apparent engagement; it is common from genuine followers but also common in low-effort bot or engagement-farm replies. Given only one comment to analyze, the evidence leans toward genuine positive engagement (hence a low fakeness score), but confidence is limited because the comment is generic and could be produced automatically. For advertising feasibility: this single data point is insufficient to conclude strong, authentic audience engagement. Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: (1) analyze a larger sample of recent comments for repetition, timing patterns, and language variety; (2) inspect commenter profiles for real follower counts, activity, and posting history; (3) check comment-to-follower ratio and comment likes; (4) look for patterns of generic praise or repeated phrases across posts (a sign of fake engagement). With more comprehensive comment and audience signals, the overall assessment can be refined; currently the post shows low suspicion but insufficient evidence to confidently recommend ad spend." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short positive / emoji-only", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express simple admiration/approval and increase visible engagement; can be genuine fandom response or low-effort/comment-bot output." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: \"Wow 😍\". This is a very short, generic positive reaction that commonly appears on influencer posts. Such comments serve to boost visible engagement but give almost no information about an engaged, purchasing audience. Strengths: it indicates at least some positive reception. Weaknesses and risks: emoji-only and one- or two-word praise are frequent patterns used by bots, engagement pods, or non-committal followers, so they are weak evidence of authentic interest or buying intent. Confidence in assessing fakeness is limited because the sample size is one comment; a single generic comment is ambiguous. For ad-purchase decisions you should not rely on this alone. Recommended next checks before buying advertising or sponsorships: examine the full comment set for diversity (questions, tagged friends, detailed praise), timing patterns (many comments in short bursts), commenter profiles (real accounts, full bios, profile pictures, posting history), follower-to-comment ratio, comment likes/replies, and external metrics (link clicks, story views, reel saves). Based on the single provided comment, I rate the comment set as moderately suspicious and give a cautious low-to-moderate suitability for advertising until a broader engagement audit is performed." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "user_mention/tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "Упоминание другого аккаунта — вероятно «отметь друга» (уведомление, привлечение внимания), либо простая персональная отметка; может также быть часть спам‑бота/комментаторского пула." } ], "interpretation": "Анализ основан на единственном комментарии «@rukiyevizercimen». Это типичный формат отметки аккаунта: либо пользователь отмечает знакомого, чтобы привлечь его внимание к посту, либо комментарий создан автоматически/в рамках «комментарного пула» для имитации вовлечённости. По одной записи нельзя надёжно отличить органическую отметку от фейковой активности — признаки подозрительности: отсутствие текстовой реакции, только ник, что часто встречается у спам‑ботов или у договорных взаимных отметок. Рекомендации: собрать больше комментариев и метаданных (время публикаций комментариев, повторяющиеся ники, профили комментаторов — возраст, активность, подписчики, фото, язык), проверить соотношение лайков/комментариев и динамику роста подписчиков. На основании одного такого комментария я бы рекомендовал с осторожностью относиться к качеству аудитории этого поста и запросить более полноту данных перед покупкой рекламного размещения." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive appreciation / gratitude", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express thanks and affection toward the poster; general positive engagement (emotional support and affirmation)." } ], "interpretation": "Comment content: \"❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍\" (German: \"mega thank you\" with heart/heart-eyes emojis). Sentiment is clearly positive and supportive. As a single data point this reads as a genuine follower expressing gratitude; language is natural and uses emojis in a typical human way, which lowers the probability of being fake. However, with only one comment and no information about the commenter account(s), timing, or volume/diversity of other comments, confidence is limited. For advertising feasibility this single supportive comment is modestly positive but insufficient evidence of broad, authentic audience engagement. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent comments, check commenter profiles for real-account signals (profile photos, posting history, follower counts, mutual interactions), measure like-to-comment ratios and engagement rate, and look for repetitive phrasing or comment-copy patterns that would indicate bot/inorganic activity." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Supportive / affirmation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement with the post and offer a brief endorsement of the message ('Right … and less is often more')." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short, positive agreement with the post's message. It reads as a genuine, context-appropriate reaction rather than a promotional, generic, or obviously automated comment. Fakeness is low because the language is natural and relevant, but confidence is not maximal because a single short comment can still be generic or part of low-effort engagement. For influencer-advertising feasibility this single comment provides only weak evidence of an engaged, high-quality audience: it shows at least one contextual supporter but tells us nothing about volume, diversity, or repeated engagement. Recommendation: gather a larger sample of comments, check like-to-follower ratios, comment timestamps, commenter profiles (real accounts vs. suspicious/bot-like), and variety of responses before deciding on ad purchase." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only applause", "count": 1, "purpose": "Quick positive reaction / affirmation and engagement boost; low-information praise that can be posted by genuine followers, casual viewers, or automated/engagement-farmed accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment ('👏👏👏👏') was provided, so any assessment is highly limited. Emoji-only applause is a generic positive signal that increases visible engagement but conveys no substantive endorsement or intent to act (no questions, no product mentions, no purchase signals). Such comments are common from real fans and casual viewers, but they are also frequently produced by low-effort accounts or purchased engagement. Given the single data point, I assign a moderate-to-high fakeness score (60) with low confidence (30) because there's insufficient context (no commenter profile data, no timestamp patterns, no volume or repetition). For advertising purchase feasibility, the comment content is weak evidence of genuine, high-value engagement; therefore the overall suitability score is low-to-moderate (35) with low confidence (25). Recommended next steps before a buying decision: analyze a larger sample of comments (content diversity, recurring commenters), check commenter profiles for authenticity (profile age, follower/following ratios, posting history), compare likes-to-comments ratio and growth patterns, inspect comment timestamps for unnatural bursts, and look for meaningful interactions (questions, product mentions, UGC). With more data those metrics can be quantified and the confidence in fakeness and overall assessment materially improved." }

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": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 72, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Engagement/Reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses admiration for the post content (kajal application) and a personal emotional reaction (shyness/hesitation)." }, { "type": "Personal anecdote/experience", "count": 1, "purpose": "Shares the commenter's own routine (makeup removal) and genuine-seeming preference for a specific product." }, { "type": "Brand mention/tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "References and tags a brand (@ohganicals), ostensibly to recommend a product to others." }, { "type": "Subtle endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Recommends a product qualitatively ('better than everything I had before') without an explicit call-to-action or commercial phrasing." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as plausibly genuine. It combines a personal reaction to the post (admiration, hesitation to approach) with a first-person product recommendation and a tagged brand. Markers supporting authenticity: specific, personal detail (shyness + removal routine), natural language flow, low-pressure endorsement, and a single emoji. Marker raising caution: explicit brand handle mention—this can be organic but is also a common pattern in paid/affiliate comments. With only one comment, it's not possible to detect network-level signs of inauthentic activity (repetition across comments, timing patterns, suspicious accounts). For influencer-ad buying decisions this comment is a modestly positive signal: it indicates an engaged audience interested in makeup and willing to recommend products. Recommendation: gather more comments and analyze account-level signals (follower quality, comment patterns, commenter account authenticity, timing, and repetition of the same brand mentions) before committing to advertising spend." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "supportive/compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement and social proof — short praise about makeup and the influencer's skill, using emojis to express enthusiasm." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: 'Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏' — a brief, on-topic positive compliment. That style is consistent with a genuine casual follower or a lightweight engagement comment; it is short and generic enough that it could also come from an engagement pod or be a low-effort bot, so fakeness is assessed as low-to-moderate (35) with moderate confidence. For advertising-feasibility: this single positive comment is mildly encouraging (overall score 60) but insufficient evidence alone. Recommend reviewing a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), like-to-comment ratio, comment diversity (questions, critiques, long-form testimonials), timing patterns, and recent sponsored post performance before purchasing ads or partnerships." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic compliment / short positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "brief positive feedback / social proof. Low informational value — can be genuine fan praise or low-effort/bot engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: a short Russian-language positive remark \"Супер 👍\". This is a generic, low-effort compliment that provides little signal about actual audience interest in the post or product. Such comments are common from both real followers and automated/paid engagement services; the brevity, lack of reference to post specifics, and presence of an emoji slightly increase the probability it may be inauthentic or low-value. Given the extremely small sample size, conclusions are tentative. For ad-buy decisions, this single comment is insufficient to demonstrate engaged, relevant audience. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent posts (comment volume, sentiment distribution), inspect commenter accounts (profile photos, bios, posting history, follower counts), measure like-to-comment ratios and engagement rates, check for repeated identical comments across posts, and review follower growth and post reach metrics. Based on current evidence, treat comments as low-confidence social proof and require deeper audit before confirming influencer suitability for advertising." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive reinforcement / social support — short encouragement likely from a follower, friend, or admirer (builds engagement and shows appreciation)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment «Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏» is a brief, affectionate compliment using a diminutive name form and multiple emojis. This style typically indicates a real follower or friend showing support rather than a detailed, transaction-oriented message. Strengths: personal tone and emojis lend authenticity. Weaknesses: the comment is generic and short, providing limited signal about meaningful audience interest or purchase intent. With only one comment, you cannot judge overall comment authenticity or organic engagement for ad-buy decisions. Recommendation: collect more comments and run additional checks (comment diversity, repeated templates, commenter profile inspection, comments-to-likes ratio, timestamps, follower quality) before concluding on advertising suitability." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only / generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Show quick approval or support; light engagement to boost visible activity (could be genuine clap of approval or low-effort/bot engagement)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: two clapping-hands emojis. This is a low-information, low-effort engagement signal. Emoji-only comments frequently appear as genuine quick reactions from followers, but they are also common from bots, engagement pods, or mass-generic accounts. With one comment alone there is insufficient evidence of healthy, organic conversation or audience quality. For advertising decisions, this sample indicates weak comment quality — proceed with caution and perform a deeper audit (look at comment diversity, repeated identical comments across posts, commenter profiles for authenticity, like-to-comment ratios, timing patterns) before committing to purchase or partnerships." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question (Logistics/Attendance)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking whether an event is happening today and how to get there — seeks information/confirmation from the poster; indicates potential real-world attendance interest." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short, direct question in German about event timing and directions. It reads as genuine follower engagement (not a generic compliment, emoji flood, tag-for-tag or link spam), lacking bot-like patterns. However, one comment is insufficient to judge overall comment authenticity or community quality. For advertising feasibility this is a small positive signal (real people asking practical questions), but you should not base a purchase decision on this alone. Recommended next steps: examine a larger sample of recent comments for diversity and natural language, compare comment volume to follower count (engagement rate), check commenter profiles for real accounts and prior activity, look for repeated templates or suspicious accounts, and review likes, saves and story interactions to corroborate genuine reach." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses enthusiasm/approval. Low-effort engagement that increases visible engagement metrics but provides little qualitative feedback; can come from genuine followers, engagement pods, or bots." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (\"🔥🔥🔥\") is a generic positive reaction and has low information value. It indicates some level of audience approval but does not demonstrate meaningful engagement (no questions, specifics, or conversation). Such short emoji comments are common both from real fans and from coordinated/bought engagement, so authenticity cannot be determined from this alone. Given only this one comment, the post's comment quality is inconclusive and leans toward low-quality engagement. For advertising decisions, request additional signals: comment diversity and substance across multiple posts, follower-quality audit (active followers, follower growth patterns), like-to-comment ratios, timing of comments, and account provenance. Based on the available evidence, I rate the comment set as moderately suspicious (fakeness ~55) and the post as marginally acceptable for advertising (~45); confidence is limited due to the extremely small sample size." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Praise / Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and approval (social proof). Short positive reaction that signals engagement and endorsement of the post content." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Unglaublich 👏👏👏\" (\"Unbelievable\" with clapping emojis). This is a brief, positive endorsement typical of genuine follower reactions. It contains both text and emojis, which slightly reduces the likelihood of being a templated bot reply. However, with only one data point it's impossible to robustly detect coordinated or fake behavior — patterns (repetition across posts, multiple similar comments, commenter account quality) are unknown. Given that, I rate the comment's fakeness low (15/100) but with moderate uncertainty (confidence 50/100). For advertising feasibility, a lone positive comment provides some social proof but is insufficient evidence of broad authentic engagement; the overall assessment is cautious (45/100) with moderate confidence (45/100). Recommend analyzing: total number of comments and likes, distribution of comment types, commenter account history (age, follower count, activity), timing of comments, and recurring phrasing across recent posts before making a buy decision." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval and quick engagement (positive reaction; increases visible engagement without substantive feedback)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). This is a non-substantive, high-level engagement signal that typically indicates enthusiasm or approval but provides no information about audience relevance, intent to purchase, or genuine interest. Short emoji-only comments are commonly left by real followers, casual viewers, engagement pods, or low-effort bot accounts — on their own they are weak evidence either for or against authenticity. Given the lack of diverse, substantive comments (questions, detailed praise, tagging friends, or criticism), the comment sample is insufficient to support a strong conclusion about audience quality. For advertising-purchase decisions, rely on additional signals: follower count and growth patterns, average likes per post, engagement rate (likes+comments/followers), comment diversity and repetition across posts, demographic alignment with the advertiser, and any patterns of identical or templated comments across multiple posts. Recommended next steps: gather a larger comment sample across several recent posts, check for repeated short emoji/comments (possible bot/pod activity), review follower authenticity metrics (follower-to-engagement ratio, sudden spikes), and request audience insights from the influencer (age, location, interests). Based on this single emoji comment, I rate the likelihood of inauthentic engagement moderately high (fakeness_score 55) but with low confidence; overall suitability for advertising is currently low to uncertain (overall_score 40) pending more comprehensive data." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Action confirmation / transactional", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short acknowledgment indicating a task has been completed or an instruction followed — likely internal/admin communication rather than audience engagement or endorsement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Erledigt' (German: 'Done') is terse and transactional. It likely reflects internal coordination (a team member, contractor or collaborator confirming completion) or a simple acknowledgement from a follower, rather than an engaged, promotional or opinionated response. As a result, the comment provides very little signal about authentic audience interest, sentiment, or influence reach. The low fakeness score reflects that such short confirmations are commonly genuine communications, but ambiguity remains (could be boilerplate/bot or repeated across posts). The overall suitability for advertising decisions based solely on this comment is low — you cannot assess audience quality, engagement depth, or authenticity from one short, context-free comment. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple posts for diversity (questions, emojis, tags, length), check commenter profiles for real accounts vs. newly created/bot-like behavior, evaluate likes and comment rates relative to follower count, and look for repeated identical comments across posts which would increase fakeness." }

Text: 🎉💚🎉🤗

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive/reactive engagement — celebratory or supportive reaction with no informational content. Low-effort engagement that can be either genuine quick-reaction or inorganic/bot-generated." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available and it consists solely of celebratory emojis (🎉💚🎉🤗). This is a weak signal: it indicates positive sentiment but provides no demographic, intent, or purchase-related information. Emoji-only replies are common from real followers but are also frequently used in engagement farms or by low-effort bot accounts, so there is a moderate chance of inauthenticity and high uncertainty. For advertising-feasibility: the single, low-content comment does not demonstrate strong, actionable audience engagement or intent; based on this limited evidence I rate overall suitability for ad purchase below average. Recommended next steps before making a buying decision: analyze a larger sample of recent comments for depth and diversity, check like-to-comment ratios, review follower quality (growth patterns, follower-to-engagement mismatch), and inspect commenter profiles for authenticity signals." }

Text: Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Fan praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive social reinforcement (personal praise, builds influencer social proof)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short, language-specific compliment in German with a heart-eyes emoji: \"Liebe Ina Du hast ein wunderschönes Gesicht 😍\". This reads as low-effort but typical follower praise rather than explicit promotion, link-spam, or call-to-action. Indicators against fakeness: personalized name mention, natural phrasing, emoji usage, and absence of commercial tokens or links. Indicators for potential inauthenticity are weakly present only in the comment's generic nature (single-sentence compliment), which is a form often seen from both genuine followers and generic bot accounts. Given only one comment, the sample size is too small to draw firm conclusions about overall audience quality. For advertising feasibility: this comment is neutral-to-slightly-positive evidence (shows at least some positive engagement), but is insufficient alone to justify an ad buy. Recommended next steps: review a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts for repetition patterns, check commenter account authenticity (profile age, follower count, activity), compare comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios, and look for repetitive phrasing or mass-posted compliments. If broader comment patterns similarly show genuine, varied engagement, the influencer becomes more viable; if comments are numerous but formulaic/repeated, that indicates higher fakeness and reduces suitability." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Genuine emotive engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express amusement/confusion, positive reaction to content, increases visible engagement and social proof" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment — “Nice! Ich schau es mir eine Million mal an und raff es trotzdem nicht😂😂😂😂” — reads as an authentic, human reaction: amused, slightly confused, and positively engaged. Characteristics supporting low probability of fakery: natural phrasing in German, context-specific humor, use of multiple emojis, and a personal reaction rather than a generic promotional phrase. With only one comment provided, however, this is a very limited sample. You cannot reliably judge overall audience quality, engagement authenticity, or suitability for advertising from one comment alone. For influencer-ad purchase decisions you should review: volume and diversity of comments, repetition of identical comments, commenter profile signals (real profile photos, follower counts, posting history), like-to-follower ratio, comment timestamps (sudden bursts), and presence of generic short praise that often indicates bot/comment-farm activity. Based on this single comment: it is a small positive signal that the content elicits an emotional response, which can be useful for creative ad placements, but it is insufficient evidence to endorse ad spend. Recommended next steps: supply a larger sample of recent comments (50–200), or provide follower and engagement metrics so a more confident assessment can be made." }