Job: @beauty_by_ina_heinrich

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive feedback / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses appreciation for content (social proof, engagement). Short, generic complimentary comment." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: 'Sehr informativ' (German: 'Very informative'). That comment is brief and positive, which makes it useful as basic social proof but provides almost no signal about audience quality or authenticity. Short, generic praise can be legitimate (a real follower appreciating the post) or a typical bot/automated/generic comment used to inflate engagement. Because there is only a single comment and no metadata (commenter profile, posting time, frequency, likes on the comment, other comments), the assessment is uncertain. I rated fakeness moderately low-to-mid (35) to reflect that generic one-word praise is common among both real users and bots. Overall suitability for advertising is low (25) given the lack of corroborating engagement data; you cannot establish a responsive, authentic audience from this evidence alone. Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: analyze a larger sample of recent comments, inspect commenter profiles for real accounts (profile photo, number of followers, posting history, bio), check engagement ratios (likes/comments per post vs follower count), look for repeated/generic phrasing across comments, and review comment timestamps for inorganic bursts. Without that, any decision based on this single comment would be high risk." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (heart)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Simple positive reaction / show affection; low-effort engagement that increases visible engagement but conveys no topical feedback or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: a solitary heart emoji. This is a low-information signal. Emoji-only comments are common among genuine followers as quick positive reactions, but they are also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort accounts. Given the single data point, I assign a moderate-to-high fakeness score (60) but with low confidence (35) because there is insufficient context (no comment diversity, timestamps, commenter profile, comment-to-like ratio, or other posts to compare). For advertising feasibility, this sample is weak — it does not demonstrate meaningful audience engagement, topical conversation, or purchase intent; therefore the overall suitability score is low (30) with low confidence (30). Recommendation: obtain more comment data (many comments across multiple posts), inspect commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), check like counts and timing patterns, and look for substantive comments or questions indicating real interest before making an advertising decision." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive praise / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration for the creator's tips; provides positive social proof and simple engagement (likes/visibility)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍') is a short, positive compliment with emojis. As a standalone datum it signals a favorable reception but is insufficient to judge audience quality or authenticity. Such brief praise is commonly genuine but also commonly used by bots or low-effort engagement farms; without commenter metadata (account age, follower count, posting history), comment timestamps, repetition across posts, or overall comment distribution, the fakeness assessment is tentative. For advertising decisions, this single positive comment is weak evidence of an engaged, relevant audience. Recommend collecting a larger sample of comments (50–200), inspecting commenter profiles for real activity, checking comment diversity, repeated phrases across posts, comment-to-like ratios, and overall engagement rate before committing to a purchase. Additional useful checks: whether comments contain specific references to content (higher authenticity), timing clusters (bot-like), and overlap between commenters and claimed target audience." }

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": 72, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which lipstick is used; compliment the color and express interest — signals purchase intent or desire for a product recommendation." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a product-focused question in German with a positive tone: the commenter asks what lipstick it is and praises the color. The language has minor grammatical errors but reads like a real user seeking product information. There are no obvious bot markers (no links, no generic emojis, no repeated phrases). Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall authenticity of the account's engagement, but this comment itself appears largely genuine and represents meaningful interest — a useful signal for advertiser conversion potential. Recommendation: before buying ad space, request a larger sample of recent comments, check commenter account profiles (activity, followers, language consistency), comment timing and repetition patterns across posts, and overall engagement rates (comments per follower, likes per post) to confirm authenticity and audience quality." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short compliment / positive emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Provide positive social proof and engagement (simple praise for visual content); signals likability but is low-effort and low predictive value for purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short comment is available: \"Schöne Farbe 😍\" (\"Nice color\"). This is a generic, positive reaction that increases apparent engagement but carries little information about audience quality, authenticity, or purchase intent. Likely explanations: a genuine follower reacting to the visual, a casual passerby, or low-effort engagement from an engagement group/bot — genuine origin is somewhat more likely but not verifiable from a single short comment. For advertiser decision-making this single data point is insufficient. Recommended next steps: inspect total number of comments and likes, diversity and timing of comments, commenter profiles (real-looking accounts vs. newly created or spammy), presence of questions/constructive feedback, saves/shares metrics, and audience demographics. If those deeper metrics look healthy, proceed with a small test campaign; if many comments are similarly generic or from suspicious accounts, treat reach/engagement as inflated and be cautious." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/thank-you", "count": 1, "purpose": "express gratitude and appreciation for content; signals follower engagement and relationship maintenance" } ], "interpretation": "Comment text: \"Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️\" — a short, personalized German thank-you with a heart emoji. Characteristics that suggest authenticity: direct address by name (Inna), natural phrasing and a casual minor grammatical slip, and an emoji that fits the sentiment. There are no promotional links, generic marketing phrases, or obvious bot patterns. Given only a single comment, the assessment is limited: this one item looks genuine and indicates at least some engaged followers, but it does not prove broad, high-quality organic engagement. For advertising purchase decisions you should request more data (multiple posts' comment samples, timestamps, commenter profiles, engagement rate, repetition of identical comments across posts, follower demographics and growth patterns). Based on this single comment, fakeness risk appears low, but overall suitability for advertising remains uncertain — score reflects a cautious, data-seeking recommendation rather than a green light." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment + content request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise (manicure/hands) and a direct request for more content (hand care tips). Indicates genuine interest and a desire for actionable/related content." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is specific, personal, and asks for additional content (hand care advice). Linguistic cues (natural phrasing, detail about manicure/hands) make it unlikely to be bot-generated or generic spam. For advertising decisions this is a positive micro-signal: followers appear interested in beauty/handcare topics and are willing to engage, which is attractive for brands in nail care, hand creams, or beauty services. However, this assessment is based on one comment only — sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. Recommended next steps before purchase: analyze a larger sample of comments for repetition/templated language, check likes-to-comments ratio, follower growth patterns, and audience demographics to confirm fit with the advertiser's target." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "User asks what product (eyeshadow) is used — indicates genuine interest and potential purchase intent." }, { "type": "compliment/positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short praise ('Tolle Farbe') plus heart-eyes emoji — provides social proof and positive sentiment." } ], "interpretation": "Комментарий выглядит аутентичным: конкретный вопрос о продукте и комплимент с эмодзи характерны для реального интереса подписчиков, а не для сгенерированных или массовых фейковых комментариев. Отсутствуют шаблонные фразы, ссылки или спам, что снижает вероятность накрутки. Однако на основании одного комментария невозможно сделать окончательный вывод о качестве всей аудитории или общем уровне вовлечённости. Для решения о покупке рекламы рекомендуется проанализировать больший срез комментариев (разнообразие вопросов, частота специфичных вопросов о продуктах), профиль комментаторов (реальные аккаунты vs. боты), общий ER (engagement rate) и соотношение лайков/комментариев. На текущем уровне — инфлюенсер выглядит перспективным для бьюти-рекламы, но требуется дополнительная проверка." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "authentic personal question / engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask about the creator's makeup (lip application) / express curiosity and engage with the post" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?') is a specific, context-relevant question about the creator's makeup technique. It reads as authentic user engagement rather than a generic praise or promotional/bot comment. Based on this one comment, there's low indication of fakeness. However, the sample size is extremely small, so overall confidence is limited; for an advertising-feasibility decision, analyze a larger comment set, commenter profiles, timing patterns, and like-to-comment ratios to draw a reliable conclusion." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/positive reaction; low informational value but contributes to visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment present: a single heart emoji. This is a generic engagement signal that can be genuine (a follower quickly reacting) but also commonly appears in low-effort or automated interactions. With a single short emoji there is insufficient evidence to judge audience quality or authenticity. For advertising decisions, this sample is inconclusive — recommend reviewing a larger set of comments, comment diversity (questions, tagged friends, long-form praise/criticism), like-to-comment ratios, follower growth patterns, and account follower quality before proceeding." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Self-deprecating humor", "count": 1, "purpose": "Выражение восхищения внешностью автора поста, создание тёплого, дружеского взаимодействия; повышает социальное доказательство без рекламной цели." } ], "interpretation": "Комментарий выглядит естественным и персонализированным: в нём есть обращение к автору («bei dir»), шутливый самоироничный элемент и эмодзи, что характерно для реальных подписчиков. Нет признаков продвижения, ссылок, повторяющихся шаблонов или типичных «бот»-маркеров (односложные общие фразы, хештеги, упоминания сторонних аккаунтов). Уровень достоверности фрагмента высокий, но выводы по посту и пригодности для рекламы ограничены одним комментарием — выборка слишком мала. Рекомендации: проанализировать больше комментариев (разнообразие реакций, повторяющиеся аккаунты), сопоставить с охватом/лайками и профилями комментаторов, проверить процент вовлечённости и наличие реальных обсуждений, чтобы принять решение о покупке рекламы." }

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": 90, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 70, "comment_types": [ { "type": "constructive feedback / technique question", "count": 1, "purpose": "User provides specific observation about the content and asks for clarification or advice (seeking help, starting a conversation). Indicates genuine interest rather than generic praise or spam." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a specific, context-aware remark in German: \"Ich finde das sieht so komisch aus, aus der Nähe, wenn man etwas weiter außen 'malt'. Oder mache ich etwas falsch?\". Its language, detail and question form strongly indicate a real user seeking advice or clarification (not a short generic compliment or emoji that often signal bots/fake engagement). There are no markers of mass-produced/fake comments (e.g., repeated phrases, vague praise, unrelated emojis, promotional links). Given only one comment provided, engagement volume is very low; that limits confidence about the overall audience quality and responsiveness. For advertising feasibility: the presence of thoughtful, genuine comments is a positive sign, but a single instance is insufficient to judge sustained, high-quality engagement. Recommended next steps before purchase: review comment volume and variety across multiple posts, like-to-comment ratio, timing patterns (to detect bursts), follower quality (real accounts vs. bots), and look for repeated/similar comments that would indicate inorganic behavior. Based on this single comment, fakeness risk is low (score 5/100) and the post’s advertising-readiness is modest (overall score 45/100) due to low comment quantity despite qualitative positive signal." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback about appearance (likely intended to praise the subject or product)." }, { "type": "Ambiguous / generic single-phrase comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short, context-free remark that could be genuine or a generic engagement phrase used by bots or low-effort accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Volle Lippen\" (German: \"Full lips\"). This is a very short, language-specific compliment that lacks context (no emoji, no user handle quoted, no question, no conversational thread). Strengths: it is positive and topical (relevant if the post is about cosmetics, lip enhancement, or beauty). Weaknesses / reasons for caution: short generic comments are commonly used by engagement bots or by low-effort followers, so authenticity is uncertain. With a single example it is impossible to assess patterns like repeated phrases across posts, commenter diversity, account quality, or timing. The fakeness score (45) reflects moderate suspicion: the comment could easily be genuine but matches common bot patterns (short, topical, no personalization). Confidence in that fakeness estimate is low-to-moderate (35) because sample size is one and no commenter metadata is available. Overall feasibility for advertising based on comments alone is low (overall score 30) — the available comment does not demonstrate high-quality organic conversation, community depth, or strong, diversified engagement that increases ad value. Confidence in the overall assessment is moderate (40) because the limited data severely constrains judgment. Recommendations: obtain more data before deciding to buy advertising — collect a larger sample of comments across recent posts, check commenter profiles for real-looking accounts (profile photo, history, follower counts, varied comments), look for repeated identical comments (bot pattern), review likes-to-comments ratio, and examine comment timestamps for bursts. If many comments are similarly short/generic and come from low-quality accounts, treat the audience as low-quality for ad targeting. If instead further comments show diverse, contextual conversation, re-evaluate with that broader dataset." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration for the influencer's advice and signal loyalty (offers social proof)." }, { "type": "Beauty opinion / Value judgment", "count": 1, "purpose": "States an absolute opinion about a physical trait (narrow lips are never beautiful), reinforcing the influencer's stance or content topic." }, { "type": "Engagement intent", "count": 1, "purpose": "Declares intent to follow the influencer's tips long-term (drives future engagement)." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as short, positive endorsement: thanks for the tip, a categorical beauty judgment, and a pledge to follow the influencer's advice. Signals consistent fan-like behavior (compliment + loyalty). Indicators of authenticity: use of personal form 'deinen', a specific reference to 'Tips' and future intent ('Werde ... immer folgen') and minor natural-language imperfections (typos/spacing) which often occur in real user comments. Indicators of possible inauthenticity: the language is generic and highly positive without detail or emojis, and uses an absolute claim ('Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön'), which can be characteristic of templated or bot-driven praise. Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions. Overall I assess a low-to-moderate likelihood of being fake (fakeness score 30/100) but with moderate uncertainty. For advertising-feasibility: the comment is favorable but anecdotal; I rate overall comment-based confidence in audience authenticity/usefulness for ads at 55/100. To make a reliable ad buy decision, analyze a larger comment sample, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), timing/repetition of similar comments, like-to-comment ratios, and diversity of engagement across posts." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 75, "overall_confidence": 70, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Content request / service interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks for a 'business makeup for photoshoot' — a direct request for specific content or a service, indicating genuine interest in product/service-related content." }, { "type": "Positive engagement (emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Includes a heart-eyes emoji, signalling enthusiasm and positive sentiment toward the idea/content." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment appears genuine: it's specific, topically relevant (makeup/photoshoot), grammatically coherent (German), and contains an enthusiastic emoji. There are no obvious bot/spam markers (no generic praise, no irrelevant links, no copy-paste phrases). For advertiser consideration, this indicates at least some of the influencer's audience is interested in professional makeup/beauty content — a positive signal for beauty, makeup, or photography-related campaigns. Caveats: assessment is based on one comment only; overall channel-level conclusions require a larger sample (multiple posts, comment diversity, like-to-comment ratios, follower authenticity). Recommended next steps: sample 50–200 recent comments across posts and check follower profiles and engagement patterns before final ad purchase decision." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic praise/compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement / social proof — short supportive remark to express admiration and boost apparent engagement; low informational value for purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍' is a brief, generic positive reaction with an emoji. Such comments are common from real followers but are equally common from bots or engagement farms because they require minimal effort. With only one comment available, there is insufficient signal to judge authenticity or audience quality reliably. The comment provides social proof but no purchase intent, no product-specific feedback, no questions, no tagging, and no conversational follow-up — all of which limits its value for advertising-feasibility decisions. Recommendation: analyze a larger sample of comments, check commenter profiles for real accounts vs. bots (profile completeness, posting history, follower/following ratios), look for repetition across posts, timing patterns, and comment diversity before trusting engagement as genuine." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking where the products are available — expresses purchase interest and is seeking actionable information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏') reads as a genuine product inquiry from a potential customer: enthusiastic emoji + a direct question about where to buy. Fakeness is low (score 10) because the phrasing is specific and conversational rather than generic or promotional. However, this assessment is based on one comment only — the sample size is too small to judge the overall authenticity of the influencer's comment section or audience quality. For advertising purchase feasibility this is a mildly positive data point (someone showing purchase intent), but not sufficient on its own to recommend an ad spend. Recommend further checks: sample a larger set of comments (50–200), examine comment timing and repetition (copy/paste patterns), inspect commenter profiles (real accounts vs. newly created/bot-like), compare comment-to-like ratio, and verify conversion signals (clicks/messages/DM inquiries)." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/compliment with emojis", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and provide lightweight engagement (boosts visible engagement and signals approval)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön\" is a short, generic positive reaction with multiple emojis. It functions primarily as lightweight praise and social proof rather than substantive feedback. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are also typical of low-effort bot comments, engagement pods, or paid commenters because of their generic form and emoji use. Given only one comment, the signal is weak: there is some positive engagement, but it does not provide meaningful evidence of an active, engaged audience or authentic community. For advertising feasibility, this alone is insufficient—recommend checking comment diversity, commenter account quality (age, follower ratio, activity), like-to-comment ratios, repetition across posts, and timing patterns before making a buy decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "direct product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used; seeking product information and showing interest / potential purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a genuine, specific product question in German asking which eyeshadow palette was used for the look. This is a high-quality engagement type: it indicates interest, intent to learn what was used, and potential purchase intent — all positive signals for an influencer's suitability for cosmetic advertising. The low fakeness score reflects the natural wording, request for detail, and lack of generic praise or emojis-only content. Limitations: this analysis is based on one comment only; it cannot assess overall comment authenticity, volume, timing, or audience composition. For a robust advertising decision, examine a larger sample of comments, comment-to-follower ratio, likes per post, commenter accounts (real vs. bots), recurrence of similar product-asking comments, and response rate from the influencer. Based on this single comment alone I rate the post moderately favorable for ad consideration (interested audience behavior), but confidence is limited due to sample size." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express brief critique about the post’s lack of subtlety; likely a genuine follower remark signaling dissatisfaction or stylistic mismatch" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Dezent ist anders\" (“That’s not subtle”) is a short, negative critique in German. Short critical comments are typically genuine reactions rather than automated/promotional messages, so the fakeness likelihood is low (fakeness_score 10). This indicates at least one follower feels the content is overt or flashy. For advertising decisions this is ambiguous: critical engagement can be a sign of authentic audience interaction (positive for authenticity metrics) but also points to a possible mismatch if your brand requires a subtle/understated presentation. With only one comment the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions; further checks are needed (volume and tone of other comments, like-to-comment ratio, follower demographics, reply patterns, timing). Overall I rate the post as moderately suitable for advertising (score 65) but with low-to-moderate confidence (45) because the assessment is based on a single short comment and limited context." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 90, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 65, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Inquiry / Product question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Information-seeking from follower (asks which products are used) — indicates genuine interest and direct engagement with the creator." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: \"Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.\" This is a straightforward, product-related question typical of a genuine follower seeking information. Fakeness is low (score 10) with high confidence because the phrasing and intent match organic audience behavior rather than generic bot language. However, the sample size (one comment) is far too small to draw reliable conclusions about overall comment authenticity, volume, or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility this single comment is mildly positive (shows real interest) but insufficient: overall score is low (30) because more data are needed — comment volume, diversity, like-to-comment ratio, timestamps, follower count, repeated templates, and other engagement signals. Recommendation: supply the full comments set, engagement metrics, and follower details for a robust assessment; also check for patterns of repeated copy-paste comments, unusual timestamp clustering, and ratio of meaningful questions/replies versus generic emojis or single-word praise." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Negative/critical feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express personal dissatisfaction/critique about appearance (eyebrows) — signals direct viewer reaction and commentary on styling or edits." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment in German criticizes the subject's eyebrows being placed too high. This is specific, context-linked feedback (not generic praise or obvious bot-like text), so it likely represents a real follower's opinion rather than fake engagement — hence a low fakeness score. However, because there is only one comment provided, the sample is far too small to draw firm conclusions about the overall audience quality or sentiment. For advertising feasibility: this single critical comment indicates followers may feel comfortable voicing honest opinions, which can be good for authenticity, but it also highlights a potential reputational risk if many similar criticisms exist. I recommend examining a larger set of comments for patterns (positive vs. negative ratio, topical relevance, diversity of accounts), engagement rates (likes, comments per follower), and follower authenticity metrics before making an ad buy decision." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / clarification", "count": 1, "purpose": "A genuine-seeming user question asking what is being used to cover/fill pores — seeks product/ingredient information and indicates purchase or usage interest." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, \"Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?\" is a direct, product-focused question in German asking what is being used to cover pores. It reads as authentic user engagement (clarification/interest) rather than promotional, generic praise, or spam. There are no signs of bot-like language, emoji-stuffing, repeated copy-paste phrases, or obvious influencer-driven pump comments. However, this is only one comment — sample size is too small to draw firm conclusions about the overall audience quality or comment authenticity across the account. For advertising decisions, this comment is a positive signal (shows genuine product curiosity) but insufficient alone. I recommend checking broader metrics: number of comments per post, comment diversity (questions vs. praise vs. tags), follower quality, timing patterns, and cross-post consistency before deciding on ad spend." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking what product(s) are shown — information-seeking, expresses purchase interest or curiosity." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was sind das für Produkte ?' — 'What kind of products are these?') is a straightforward, likely genuine inquiry. It shows user curiosity and a possible purchase intent signal; it is neither promotional nor clearly templated or spammy. There are no typical bot indicators (repeated phrases, emojis-only, generic compliments, links). However, this is only one comment: you cannot reliably assess overall comment authenticity, audience quality, or engagement patterns from a single data point. I rated fakeness low (10) with moderate confidence (70%) because the comment content and form are typical of real users. The overall suitability score for advertising (45) is cautious and low-to-mid because one natural comment is positive but insufficient as evidence of meaningful, authentic engagement. To improve assessment, analyze a larger sample of comments for repetition, language mix, timing patterns, user profile checks (age, followers, posting history), comment-to-like ratio, distribution of comment types (questions, praise, tags, spam), and presence of coordinated phrases or link-dropping." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/affection or approval in a low-effort way; primarily to show engagement rather than provide information. Such comments inflate apparent engagement but give little signal about real audience interest or influence." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment provided, consisting of three heart emojis. Emoji-only comments are common and ambiguous: they can indicate genuine positive sentiment from a follower, or be low-effort/bot/engagement-pod activity used to boost visible engagement. With a single short emoji comment there is very limited signal about audience quality, relevance, or authenticity. For advertising decisions this is weak evidence — it neither confirms an engaged, relevant audience nor demonstrates suspicious activity on its own. Recommend collecting a larger and more varied sample of comments and examining commenter accounts (profile completeness, post history, followers, comment repetition across posts), the ratio of substantive vs. low-effort comments, like-to-comment ratios, and comment timing patterns before making a purchase decision." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive feedback / social validation (short praise of the post content)" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Richtig schön\" (German for \"Really/Very beautiful\"). This is a short, generic positive remark that provides social proof but little informational value. Such brief compliments are common from genuine followers but are also used by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort accounts — there is no additional context (no emojis, no @mentions, no questions) to increase confidence either way. Given the limited sample, the assessed fakeness is relatively low-to-moderate (30/100) but with only moderate confidence (45/100). For advertising purchase decisions this single comment is insufficient: the overall score is therefore cautious (45/100) with low confidence (30/100). Recommended next steps before buying advertising: (1) analyze a larger sample of recent comments for diversity, language match, and conversational replies; (2) inspect commenter profiles for real-looking accounts (profile pictures, posting history, follower counts); (3) calculate engagement rate (likes, comments relative to follower count) and time distribution of comments; (4) look for patterns of repeated short generic comments across posts (sign of bots/engagement networks). These checks will materially increase confidence in authenticity and ad feasibility." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "выражение одобрения/восхищения и повышение метрик вовлечения минимальными усилиями" } ], "interpretation": "Предоставлен один комментарий — набор из трёх огненных эмодзи (🔥🔥🔥). Такой комментарий однозначно позитивный, но низкоинформативный: он повышает видимые метрики вовлечения, но не даёт контекстной или проверяемой обратной связи. Подобные короткие эмодзи часто оставляют реальные подписчики, но также широко используются ботами, фолловер-подписями и engagement-pods, поэтому вероятность фейковости средняя (оценка 45) с умеренно низкой уверенностью — данные очень ограничены. Для надёжной оценки рекламной пригодности нужно больше данных: количество и разнообразие комментариев, временные паттерны (всплески), профили комментаторов (реальные аккаунты vs новые/анонимные), соотношение лайков к подписчикам, наличие содержательных обсуждений и повторяющихся шаблонных комментариев. На основе одного такого комментария рекомендация по покупке рекламы — осторожная/негативная (оценка 35), с низкой уверенностью; рекомендуется собрать и проанализировать расширенный срез комментариев и аудитории перед принятием решения." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "defensive/supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defends the creator against perceived criticism about Botox and redirects discussion to the post's topic (makeup technique); signals topical engagement and viewer alignment with the creator." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short, informal German defense of the creator ('Even if she had Botox? So what? This is about makeup technique!'). It appears genuine rather than bot-like: it is context-specific, expresses opinion, and addresses another potential commenter or criticism. As an isolated datapoint this is positive for advertising: it shows topical, protective audience engagement and indicates at least some viewers are focused on content (makeup technique) rather than off-topic criticism. However, one comment is insufficient to draw robust conclusions about overall comment authenticity, audience quality, or engagement patterns. To judge advertising feasibility reliably, review a larger sample of comments for diversity of sentiment, timing (burst patterns), comment-to-like ratio, commenter profiles (follower counts, activity), and presence of generic/promo-style comments. Based on this single comment, risk of widespread fake commenting is low, but confidence in a site-wide assessment is limited." }

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": 75, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Transformation remark", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback praising the subject's appearance and perceived transformation; functions as social proof and supportive engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a positive, detailed compliment noting a transformation and mentioning hairstyle and clothing. Its specificity and natural phrasing (including a nuance about contributing factors and an emoji) make it more likely genuine than canned or bot-like, hence a low fakeness score. However, this is only one comment — insufficient to judge overall audience authenticity, engagement quality, or conversion potential. For advertising feasibility, the evidence here is weak: the comment provides some social proof but no indications of strong, broad engagement or intent to purchase. Recommend analyzing a larger sample of recent comments, commenter profiles (real accounts vs. throwaway handles), comment diversity/repetition across posts, like-to-comment ratios, and follower quality before making a buy decision." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive generic compliment with emojis", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express praise/appreciation and provide social proof; lightweight engagement that signals approval but adds no substantive feedback or conversion intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏' is a short, enthusiastic compliment in German using multiple emojis. This kind of comment functions primarily as positive social proof but contains no substantive engagement (no question, no tagging, no purchase intent). Because it is generic and emoji-heavy it is common both among genuine followers and among low-effort bot or purchased comments; with only one comment provided, there is insufficient evidence to strongly classify authenticity. For advertising feasibility this single comment is a weak signal: it shows basic audience approval but not engaged or action-oriented interaction. Recommendation: analyze a larger sample of comments, check commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history), look at comment timing relative to post, likes-to-comments ratio, and presence of conversational comments or UGC to better assess real engagement and fraud risk before deciding on ad spend." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic praise / emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration or positive reaction; low-effort engagement that boosts visible social proof." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment ('Wow 😍') is provided, which limits reliable inference. Single-word or emoji praise is common both from genuine casual followers and from inorganic sources (engagement pods or purchased comments). Given its generic nature it slightly leans toward being low-effort or potentially inorganic, but there is high uncertainty. For advertising feasibility this single comment neither shows strong audience quality nor strong signs of manipulation; it's neutral. Recommended next steps before a buy decision: analyze a larger sample of comments for diversity and specificity, check commenter account profiles (age, follower counts, activity), look at comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and audience demographics." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "mention/tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "Tagging another user to draw their attention to the post (could be organic recommendation or simple spam/engagement-seeking mention)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is present and it is a single @username mention. This is most commonly a user tagging a friend to show them the post, but identical short tags are also used by low-effort commenters or automated bots. With a single tag there is very limited signal about audience quality or genuine engagement. Fakeness risk is moderate-low (some chance of benign tagging, some chance of spam/bot). For advertising decisions, this single comment neither supports nor strongly opposes investing: it indicates low visible conversational depth. Recommend collecting more data (total comments, likes, follower quality, recurrence of similar tags, commenter account activity and follower counts, timestamps and comment diversity) before making a buy decision. If many comments are similar single-name tags or from inactive accounts, downgrade suitability; if comments are diverse and from real accounts, suitability improves." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive generic / emoji-only", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/positive reaction and boost visible engagement; likely low informational value (could be a genuine follower, a polite reply, or a low-effort bot/spam comment)." } ], "interpretation": "There is only a single short comment: \"❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍\". It is emoji-heavy and contains a brief, generic phrase of thanks. This type of comment commonly appears both from genuine followers offering praise and from automation or engagement pods because it is non-specific and universally positive. Given the single data point, the fakeness assessment is uncertain (moderate probability of being non-genuine). For advertising feasibility this single comment provides almost no reliable signal about audience quality, authenticity, or interest: you cannot judge real engagement, sentiment depth, or conversion likelihood from one generic emoji comment. Recommendation: analyze a larger sample of recent posts (comments content diversity, repetition, timing), check follower quality (follower growth patterns, follower/account metadata), and compare like:comment ratios and comment author profiles before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "agreement/positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses agreement and brief endorsement of the post's message (concise praise/support)." } ], "interpretation": "Sample size is extremely small (one comment) so conclusions are limited. The single comment — \"Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr\" — is a short, natural-sounding affirmation likely from a real user: it specifically agrees with the post and adds a minor opinion (less is often more). Language is not overly generic or templated, lacks promotional language or emojis commonly seen in bot/farm comments. Given only one comment, engagement quality cannot be assessed (no information on commenter profile, follower counts, or additional comments). For advertising feasibility: this single authentic-seeming comment is mildly positive but insufficient to judge overall audience authenticity, engagement depth, or targeting fit. Recommendation: obtain a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles, likes, comment timestamps, and engagement rates before making a purchase decision." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only applause", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short positive reaction / encouragement; low-effort engagement that signals approval but provides no substantive feedback or intent to purchase." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a string of clapping-hands emojis (👏👏👏👏). Emoji-only comments are common and serve to register quick approval or enthusiasm, but they carry very little signal about audience quality, purchase intent, or meaningful engagement. Such comments can be genuine (a casual fan) or produced by engagement pods or low-quality bot accounts — there is no way to distinguish from one isolated emoji comment. Given only this comment, the sample size is too small to draw reliable conclusions. For advertising-purchase decisions, this comment pattern is weak evidence of a high-value, engaged audience: it increases superficial engagement metrics but does not indicate conversions, interest in products, or an engaged community that leaves thoughtful feedback. Recommendation: request a larger sample of comments across recent posts and examine commenter profiles (follow counts, activity, bios), diversity of comment types (questions, testimonials, tagged friends), like:comment ratio, saves/shares if available, and historical campaign performance. Without those, treat this post's comment signal as low-quality and proceed cautiously (consider a small test campaign before committing)." }

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": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "personal engagement / anecdote", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses a personal feeling (shyness about addressing others), creates rapport and genuine-seeming reaction to the post content." }, { "type": "product endorsement / brand mention", "count": 1, "purpose": "Recommends a specific product (mentions @ohganicals) and gives a short evaluation/comparison to previous products." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads like a real user reaction: informal language, an emoji, first-person experience and a specific product recommendation. These features lower the likelihood of it being manufactured (low fakeness score). The tagged brand could be a genuine endorsement or a casual mention; it is not overtly templated or copy-paste promotional text, which supports authenticity. However, this is only one comment — the sample is too small to generalize about the whole post. For advertising-feasibility decisions this comment is mildly positive (shows product interest and authentic engagement), but you should evaluate a larger sample of comments, commenter account quality (activity, followers, history), likes-to-comments ratio, and presence of repeated/identical comments to more reliably judge audience authenticity and campaign suitability." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive compliment / endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine praise and support for the content (praising makeup results), likely intended to engage and show approval; also increases visible engagement via emojis." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided ('Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏') reads as a straightforward, positive endorsement. Language is natural German, includes relevant topical content (make-up) and expressive emojis, and does not show common bot/spam markers (generic phrases, links, handles, repeated hashtags). Based on this alone the comment's fakeness is low (estimated 15/100). However, this is one comment only — sample size is too small to draw robust conclusions about the whole comment set or audience quality. For advertising feasibility this single example is mildly encouraging (overall score 60/100) because it indicates some real topical engagement, but you should request a larger sample and additional checks: reviewer should examine commenter profiles (follower counts, activity, follower/following ratio), distribution of comment types, timing patterns (many comments posted simultaneously), repeated phrases across comments, like-to-comment ratio, and presence of suspicious accounts. With those additional data you can raise confidence and better decide on ad spend." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/encouragement; low-information engagement that can boost visible metrics (likes/comments) but provides little qualitative insight about audience interest." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment ('Супер 👍') is available. This is a generic, positive reaction that could come from a genuine follower, an acquaintance, or an automated/generic engagement bot — there is no content-specific signal (no question, detail, or personal reference). With this lone data point: (1) the comment adds superficial engagement but little proof of attentive or targeted audience; (2) fakeness is plausible because bots/engagement farms frequently post brief compliments, but it is equally plausible to be genuine — hence moderate fakeness score and moderate confidence. For advertising purchase decisions, this single comment is insufficient evidence of a real, responsive audience. I recommend obtaining a larger sample of comments and account-level signals: comment diversity and depth, commenter profile checks (age, follower counts, posting history), timing patterns, like-to-follower ratio, and reply behavior from the influencer. Based on current minimal data, the post's comment quality is low-to-moderate for supporting an ad buy (overall score 35) with limited confidence." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Praise (short, emoji-heavy)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and positive reinforcement; increase visible engagement and social proof. Low-effort reaction that signals support from a follower or casual viewer." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a brief, positive compliment addressed directly to the account owner (use of the diminutive name 'Инночка') with multiple emojis. Signals of authenticity: personal address (name/diminutive) and natural phrasing suggest a real follower or acquaintance. Signals of possible inauthenticity: very short text and repetitive emojis are common in both genuine casual comments and inorganically generated comments (bots/engagement pods). Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions. For influencer-ad buying decisions this single example is neutral-to-slightly-positive: it shows positive sentiment but provides no evidence of meaningful, engaged audience (no substantive message, no questions, no discussion). Recommended next steps before purchasing: inspect a larger sample of recent comments for variety and depth; check commenter profiles for real accounts (age, activity, follower counts, mutual interactions); evaluate like-to-comment ratio and timing patterns (bursts that suggest pods/bots). If most comments are similar (generic compliments/emojis), downrate audience quality; if many comments are personal and specific, confidence in genuine engagement increases." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only / low-effort engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Generic approval or applause; simple social proof to boost visible engagement and algorithmic signal" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a short emoji-only response (two clapping hands). Emoji-only comments are common and serve as low-effort approval or social-proof signals; they are used by real followers as well as by engagement-farming accounts/bots. With only one comment available, there is insufficient evidence to reliably determine authenticity. The moderate fakeness score reflects the ambiguity: emoji-only comments are slightly more likely to be automated or low-value engagement than substantive comments, but can also be genuine. The overall advertising-feasibility score is below neutral because a single low-content comment provides little insight into audience quality, sentiment, or genuine engagement. Recommendation: before deciding on ad spend, analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, inspect commenter profiles (activity, follower counts, posting history), review like counts and engagement rate relative to follower size, check for repetitive or templated comments, and examine comment timing patterns. These additional checks will substantially increase assessment confidence." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking for event/date and directions — indicates genuine interest in attending or participating; seeks logistical information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Ist es nicht heute? wenn ja, wie komm ich dahin?') is a direct, context-specific question about timing and how to get to an event. This is typical of authentic audience engagement (practical, not generic praise or promotional language). There are no markers of spam, generic bot comments, or promotional messaging in this comment. However, a single authentic comment is insufficient to judge the overall comment quality or audience authenticity for advertising decisions. Recommendations: review a larger sample of recent posts for comment volume, diversity, timing, repeated phrases/users, and compare engagement rate to follower count; check commenter profiles for real accounts and geographic alignment with the influencer's claimed audience. Based on this single data point the comments appear genuine but there is low evidence overall to confidently approve ad spend — further comment sampling and engagement metrics are needed." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive reaction/approval and produce quick visible engagement (social proof)" } ], "interpretation": "The sole comment is three 'fire' emojis, a generic positive reaction that provides very little informational content. Such emoji-only comments commonly serve to signal approval or boost visible engagement but do not indicate substantive audience interest in the creator's message or product. Authentic followers often leave this type of short encouragement, but the same pattern is also used by engagement pods or low-effort bot accounts; with only one comment and no commenter metadata, the risk of non-organic origin is moderate. For advertising decisions this single comment is weak evidence: it shows at least some audience reaction but not meaningful engagement depth (no questions, no product interest, no conversion signal). I recommend further checks before purchase: analyze commenter account profiles (age, follower counts, activity), overall comment variety and timing, likes-to-comments ratio, historical engagement consistency, and audience demographics. Based solely on this comment, I assign a low–moderate trust in authenticity and a cautious, below-average suitability for ad spend pending more data." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short positive/emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/approval and provide visible social proof; lightweight engagement to boost post metrics (likes/comments)." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short comment was provided: \"Unglaublich 👏👏👏\" (German for \"Unbelievable\" with clapping emojis). This is a generic positive reaction that serves primarily as social proof and lightweight engagement. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are also the type most easily faked or posted by low-effort bot accounts or engagement farms, because they require minimal effort and contain no post-specific detail. Given the single data point, the fakeness score is kept relatively low (25) but with modest confidence (40) because short generic praise is ambiguous. The overall suitability of this post for advertising is rated slightly above midpoint (55) with low confidence (30) due to insufficient data: a single generic comment does not reveal commenter authenticity, audience relevance, engagement depth, or comment diversity. To produce a reliable assessment for ad buying, analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts and collect metadata: commenter profiles (follower counts, activity), comment timestamp patterns, repetition of identical comments across posts, like-to-comment ratios, and presence of substantive, post-specific replies. If further comment data or account metrics are provided, I can give a more confident and detailed evaluation." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "express approval/excitement; increases visible engagement but provides no substantive feedback. Could be genuine low-effort fan response or automated/engagement-pod activity." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is three fire emojis (🔥🔥🔥). Emoji-only comments are common, low-information signals: they raise visible engagement but do not demonstrate meaningful audience interest or purchase intent. Such comments are frequently used by real followers as quick positive reactions, but they are also commonly produced by bots or engagement pods because they are low-effort and repeatable. Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions — the elevated fakeness score reflects that emoji-only responses are a common pattern in inorganic engagement, but confidence is low because there is insufficient data. For an advertising decision, request a larger sample of comments, commenter account checks (age, follower counts, posting history), engagement rate over multiple posts, comment diversity and timing patterns, and any signs of repeat identical comments to better assess authenticity before purchasing advertising." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 20, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Single-word administrative/confirmation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Indicates a completed task or status update (e.g., 'Erledigt' = 'Done'). Low informational value for audience engagement; likely from a collaborator, staff, or a low-effort responder rather than an engaged follower." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is present: the single German word 'Erledigt' ('Done/Completed'). This comment is low-effort and administrative in tone, providing no clear endorsement, sentiment, or interaction with the post content. It could plausibly come from a team member, vendor, or an automated/account used for workflow notes — any of which reduces its value as authentic audience engagement. Given the extremely small sample, the fakeness estimate is cautious (moderately high) but with low confidence. For advertising decisions, this comment by itself is a weak signal: it does not demonstrate real follower interest, conversation, or influence. Recommend obtaining the full set of comments, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), likes, engagement rates over time, and comment timestamps to make a reliable purchase decision." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Text: +

Text: +

Text: Und weiss du mein make up heute erinnert mich an mich😍😅 ich möchte mich immer dezent schminken wie bei deine rechte Seite- zart, süß und als Ergebnis bekomme ich doch wie deine linke, ausdrucksvoll und heiß 😅😅😅

Text: Liebe Ina , das war wieder mal ein schöner Abend mit dir 😊.Danke 🙂

Text: Sehr schön 💕

Text: Liebe Ina, ich kann ja leider mittwochs nie live dabei sein, aber schaue mir im Nachhinein immer Deine Videos an. Du hast Dich wieder wunderschön geschminkt.Virken Dank, dass Du die Videos immer abspeicherst, damit man sich die später noch anschauen kann. Liebe Grüße, Britta🫶😘

Text: +

Text: Es war ein toller Abend. Jedes Mal lernt man was neues 🔥😍vielen Dank liebe Ina 🫶🥰

Text: War ein sehr schöner Abend ❤️

Text: War super wie immer❤️❤️dankeschön!!

Text: Mittwochs Live 20:00 Uhr ist Pflicht mittlerweile 🤩 Vielen lieben Dank für deine Mühe Liebe Ina 🫶🏻

Text: Ina du bist die beste ! 😍

Text: Vielen lieben Dank liebe Ina😘 ohne große Hoffnung mache ich bei Gewinnspielen mit, weil ich ja kaum was gewinne, aber heute hab ich gewonnen 🏅 ich freue mich rieeewsig

Text: Was ist das für eine schöne Farbe? Wo gibt es die!!!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / Purchase intent", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks where the item (color) can be bought — indicates direct interest in acquiring the product and potential conversion." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment — \"Was ist das für eine schöne Farbe? Wo gibt es die!!!\" — reads as a genuine product-focused inquiry and a compliment. It directly asks where to buy, which is higher-value engagement than a generic emoji or single-word praise. Fakeness risk appears low because the language is specific and action-oriented; however, assessment confidence is moderate because it's only one comment and there is no context about the commenter account (new/follower count, posting history) or the broader comment distribution. For advertising feasibility: this comment is a positive signal (shows demand/interest and potential for conversion), but you should not base a buy decision on a single data point. Recommended next checks before purchase: (1) analyze a larger sample of comments for proportion of genuine inquiries vs. generic replies, (2) inspect commenter profiles for authenticity (age, follower/following ratio, activity), (3) check timing patterns (many similar comments posted simultaneously can indicate pods/bots), and (4) measure actual conversion or click-through behavior from past sponsored posts by this influencer. If many comments mirror this one and commenter accounts look authentic, the influencer is more likely to deliver reachable potential customers." }

Text: Wie zauberhaft du das erklärst ♥️✨

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation for the creator's explanation, signal social approval and encourage the creator; contains emojis to amplify positive tone." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: \"Wie zauberhaft du das erklärst ♥️✨\" (\"How magically you explain that\"). It is a direct, personalized compliment with supporting emojis. Indicators point toward a genuine positive reaction rather than generic spam: it addresses the creator personally ('du'), uses a descriptive adjective ('zauberhaft') and emojis, and contains no links, calls-to-action, or repeated templated phrasing. False-positive possibilities: short compliments can sometimes come from low-effort accounts or coordinated engagement, but there is no clear evidence here. Given the single-data-point nature of this sample, conclusions are limited. For influencer-ad feasibility the comment is a small positive signal but insufficient alone to judge overall authenticity or audience quality. Recommend collecting more comments and metadata (commenter profiles, timestamps, repetition patterns, follower overlap, reply threads, language distribution, overall comment diversity) before making a buying decision." }

Text: Welche Produkte benutzt du?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "direct product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine follower asking which products the influencer uses — indicates interest, potential purchase intent or desire to replicate the influencer's routine." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Welche Produkte benutzt du?\" (German: \"Which products do you use?\") reads as a straightforward, specific question typical of genuine audience engagement and potential consumer interest. It is not a generic compliment, emoji spam, or clearly templated message, which lowers the likelihood of it being fake. However, this is only one data point: assessment confidence is limited. To judge overall authenticity and advertising suitability you should examine more comments across multiple posts, check the commenter's account (real-looking profile, follower ratio, activity), measure comment-to-like ratio and diversity of commenters, and look for patterns of repetitive or suspicious comments. Based on this one comment, there is weak positive evidence (audience interest) but insufficient information to make a strong decision about ad purchase." }

Text: Könntest du evtl mal was über make up oder fondation sagen, für die Haut ab 50 und was sich nicht in Falten ansetzt, dass wäre toll!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 90, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Content request / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Follower asking for specific content (makeup/foundation recommendations for skin 50+) — indicates genuine interest, seeks actionable advice and product-related information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided is a natural, specific request in German for makeup/foundation advice for skin over 50 that doesn't settle into wrinkles. Linguistic cues (minor spelling, conversational phrasing) and the specificity of the ask point to an authentic follower rather than a generic promotional or spam comment. Purpose is engagement and content suggestion rather than blunt promotion or bot-like praise. For influencer advertising feasibility this is a positive signal: the audience includes at least some followers in the mature-beauty segment who request product-focused content, which aligns well with cosmetic brands targeting 50+ skin. Limitations: analysis is based on one comment only — not enough to conclude overall audience quality, engagement rate, or follower demographics. Recommended next steps before purchase decision: sample a larger set of comments across several posts, check commenter profiles for real accounts and follower overlap, calculate like-to-comment ratios, review audience demographics (age, location), and inspect timing/patterns for signs of purchased engagement. Based on this single comment the risk of fake engagement is very low, and topical fit for beauty/anti-aging products looks promising, but confidence is limited until more data is reviewed." }

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/generic appreciation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Brief endorsement — acknowledges the content as informative and provides lightweight positive engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment was provided: \"Sehr informativ\" (\"Very informative\"). This is a generic positive reaction that looks human and context-appropriate but is minimal in substance. With one short comment there is very limited signal about audience quality, diversity, or organic engagement; the risk of fakeness appears low based on wording, but confidence is limited because of the tiny sample. For advertising feasibility: current evidence is insufficient to recommend purchase — engagement depth and volume are unclear. Additional data needed (more comments, likes, follower quality, comment timing, language distribution, repeated patterns) to raise confidence and produce a reliable decision." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (heart)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express simple positive reaction / support; low informational value (no product feedback, no conversation)." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: a lone heart emoji. Emoji-only comments commonly indicate positive sentiment but carry little signal about genuine interest in content or purchase intent. They are also frequently produced by both real followers and automated/bot accounts, so a single heart is ambiguous. Given only one comment, it is not possible to judge overall community quality, diversity, or authenticity. The moderate fakeness score (30/100) reflects that emoji comments are somewhat more likely to be automated than substantive comments, but the confidence is low due to extremely limited data. For advertising feasibility this sample is insufficient: the low overall score (35/100) reflects limited engagement evidence from comments alone. Recommended next steps before deciding to advertise: obtain the full comment set and timestamps; check commenters' profiles for real accounts (profile pics, bios, follower counts, posting history); compare likes vs followers to estimate engagement rate; look for varied comment types (questions, tagged friends, product mentions, long-form comments) and repetition patterns that indicate bot farms. With broader, richer comment data a more confident assessment can be given." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/affection and provide visible engagement; increases perceived social proof but gives no substantive feedback about content or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍\". It is a short, positive, emoji-rich compliment in German. Features that reduce confidence in authenticity: brevity, generic wording (no specifics about a tip or product), and high emoji usage — patterns common in both genuine quick-fan responses and automated/generic bot comments. Features that slightly increase likelihood of genuineness: language matches a plausible follower interaction and the comment is not overtly promotional. With this solitary data point there is insufficient evidence to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For an advertising purchase decision, this alone is weak support — you should analyze a larger sample of recent comments, like-to-follower ratio, commenter account ages and activity, repetition of similar comments across posts, timing patterns, and whether commenters engage repeatedly or convert. Based on the single comment, I rate the fakeness risk moderate (35/100) but with low confidence (30/100) and give a tentative low–moderate feasibility score for advertising (40/100) with low confidence (25/100)." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / purchase intent", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks which lipstick/shade it is — indicates curiosity and potential purchase intent." }, { "type": "Compliment / positive engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Gives a compliment about the color and appearance — signals positive reception and genuine interest." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment appears organic and consumer-driven: it asks a direct product question and compliments the item. The language is slightly non-native but still plausible for a real follower rather than a bot or generic spam (no links, no templated praise, no emoji-only content). As a signal for advertising feasibility, it is positive — it shows product interest and engagement relevant to beauty advertising — but it is only a single data point. Recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments (volume, repetition, timing), checking commenter profiles (real accounts, follower/following ratios, past activity), and measuring like/comment ratios and conversion signals before making a buy decision. Risks: a small number of genuine comments can coexist with inauthentic engagement elsewhere; current evidence moderately supports product relevance but is insufficient alone to confirm high-quality audience. " }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "express appreciation / positive reaction (boost social proof); low informational value about real engagement" } ], "interpretation": "Есть только один комментарий — «Schöne Farbe 😍» (нем. «Красивый цвет»). По содержанию это короткий положительный отзыв с эмодзи. Такой формат часто оставляют реальные подписчики как быстрый комплимент, но он также типичен для автоматизированных/массовых комментариев ботов и «лайк-фарм» аккаунтов, поскольку не содержит персонализации или развёрнутого мнения. На основе одного комментария нельзя надёжно судить о подлинности аудитории или качестве вовлечённости. Рекомендации для рекламного решения: собрать больше данных — количество комментариев и их разнообразие, соотношение лайков к подписчикам, активность в сторис/директе, временные паттерны и аудитория (гео/язык). При текущих данных — небольшая положительная сигнальная ценность, но низкая информационная ценность; я бы оценил пригодность для рекламы как средне-низкую (45/100) и рекомендовал дальнейшую проверку перед покупкой рекламы." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Appreciation/Thank-you", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express gratitude for the influencer's tips; positive feedback that acts as social proof and engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️') reads as a genuine thank-you from a follower: it addresses the influencer by name, references 'tips' specifically, and includes an emoji. These features reduce the likelihood it's an automated generic spam comment. However, this is only one data point. From an advertising-purchase perspective this comment is mildly positive evidence of audience engagement but is insufficient to judge overall authenticity or commercial value. Recommended next checks before buying ads: sample a larger set of recent comments, inspect commenter profiles for real accounts vs. bots, check timing and repetition patterns, compare comment-to-like ratio, and look for duplicated or templated praise. Based on the single comment alone I assign low fakeness but only moderate confidence and give a cautious, mid-range overall feasibility score." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment/Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive social proof to the influencer (builds credibility and attractiveness)." }, { "type": "Content request / Product interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks for information about hand care—signals interest in the niche and potential product intent." } ], "interpretation": "The comment reads as natural and specific (mentions manicure and hand care), so it likely comes from a genuine follower rather than an automated bot. It serves two purposes: praising the influencer (which boosts perceived authority/appeal) and requesting more content about hand care (which indicates topical interest and potential receptiveness to product recommendations). For advertising, this is a positive single data point: it suggests at least some of the audience is interested in nail/hand-care content. However, this is only one comment — you should not generalize from it alone. Recommend auditing a larger sample of comments for repetition, generic phrasing, timing patterns, and cross-checking engagement rates and follower authenticity before making an advertising buy. Overall assessment: promising for handcare/nail product campaigns but requires broader comment and audience analysis to have high confidence." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow was used; expresses appreciation (compliment + emoji) and signals interest/potential purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍\". This reads as a natural, specific question plus a compliment and emoji, which are typical of real follower engagement rather than generic bot spam. Therefore the estimated fakeness is low (15) but confidence is moderate-low (55) because the sample size is one comment. For advertising feasibility: the comment indicates product interest and positive sentiment, which is a good sign, but a single engaged comment is insufficient to conclude reliable audience quality. To make a robust ad-buy decision, request a larger comment sample, overall engagement rate (likes/comments per follower), timing patterns, commenter account checks (real profiles vs. obvious bots), and comment diversity. Key caveats: with only one comment, assessment is preliminary. Recommended next steps: analyze 100+ recent comments, check commenter profiles and follower overlap, and compare to averages for similar influencers." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Follower asks about the creator's appearance (lip makeup) — seeks information/clarification and engages with the post content." }, { "type": "Constructive critique / observation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Implied mild critique or observation about makeup application — indicates attention to detail and authentic viewer reaction." }, { "type": "Praise / compliment", "count": 0, "purpose": "No explicit praise found in the provided comment." }, { "type": "Spam / promotional / bot-like", "count": 0, "purpose": "No signs of templated, promotional, or bot-like language in the provided comment." }, { "type": "Emoji-only / short reaction", "count": 0, "purpose": "No emoji-only or single-word reactions present." } ], "interpretation": "Sample size is extremely small (one comment). The single comment is a direct, topical question in German about whether the creator's lips are over-painted, which reads as authentic audience engagement (not spam or generic bot content). This suggests at least some viewers care about makeup details — potentially relevant for cosmetics advertisers. However, with only one comment it's impossible to assess overall engagement quality, scale, or whether comments are generally organic across the account. Fakeness is assessed low (10/100) but confidence is moderate because only one comment was available. Overall advertising feasibility is rated moderate-low (45/100) with low confidence: the comment tone is relevant for beauty ads, but you need more data (total comment volume, variety, follower-to-engagement ratio, timestamp distribution, other comment contents) to make a reliable buy/sponsorship decision." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "signal positive reaction / low-effort engagement to boost metrics and show support" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it is a single heart emoji (❤️). Emoji-only comments are common, low-information, and can come from genuine followers or from low-effort bot accounts; they do not provide topical feedback, conversion intent, or meaningful audience insight. Given the extremely limited sample, the fakeness estimate is moderately low (30) because there is no clear bot signature, but confidence is limited (40). For ad-buy decisions this comment alone is insufficient; the overall assessment is cautious (40) with low confidence (30). Recommend analyzing a larger set of comments, commenter account profiles (age, follower counts, activity), like-to-comment ratio, comment repetition patterns, timing, and language consistency before making a purchasing decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration for the influencer's appearance and reinforce positive sentiment toward the post." }, { "type": "relatable / self-deprecating", "count": 1, "purpose": "User compares themselves to the influencer to create rapport and relatability; increases perceived authenticity of the engagement." }, { "type": "emoji-rich engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Use of emojis (😂, 😍) to convey tone (humor, affection) and strengthen emotional engagement; quick, natural interaction signal." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a natural, conversational remark: the commenter playfully self-deprecates ('I don't even have enough lip to make them fuller...') then compliments the influencer ('with you everything looks great'), using emojis to set tone. There are no obvious bot markers (no repeated phrases, no promotional links, not generic one-word spam). That suggests low likelihood of being fake for this specific comment. However, this is only one data point — you cannot assess overall audience authenticity or engagement quality from a single comment. For advertising feasibility, this comment is a positive sign (real-sounding, engaged follower), but I assign a cautious overall score because broader signals are missing: total number of comments, ratio of substantive vs. generic comments, comment timing patterns, follower quality, likes-to-comment ratio, and any repetitive phrasing across multiple comments should be checked. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments, check commenter account ages and activity, look for identical comments across posts, and compare engagement rate to follower count before making a buying 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": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Constructive criticism / genuine question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Give feedback on the creator's technique and request clarification or help; indicates attention to detail and genuine engagement rather than promotional intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Ich finde das sieht so komisch aus, aus der Nähe, wenn man etwas weiter außen 'malt'. Oder mache ich etwas falsch?\") reads as a real user asking about technique and expressing mild critical observation. This is not promotional, not spam, and likely authentic (low fakeness). For influencer-ad buying this is mildly positive: it shows an engaged, detail-oriented follower who cares about the content quality, which can be valuable for niche/specialist products. However, one comment is an extremely small sample — you need volume, diversity of commenters, like ratios, timing, and commenter account checks (profiles, followers, past activity) to make a reliable decision. Recommended next steps: examine more comments across several recent posts, check commenter authenticity (profile age, follower/following ratio, engagement history), and measure sentiment and engagement rate before committing to an ad buy." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / appearance", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the influencer's looks (short positive remark), likely to signal admiration or attraction and to increase visible engagement on the post." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short comment is available: \"Volle Lippen\" (German for \"full lips\"). This is a concise appearance-focused compliment. Such comments are common, low-effort, and can be genuine praise from a follower or generic engagement from an account aiming to appear active. Given the single-sample input, the comment appears more likely authentic than clearly fake, but the sample size is far too small to draw robust conclusions about the overall comment stream or audience quality. For advertising feasibility: this single comment provides minimal evidence of a responsive, relevant audience. Recommended next steps before purchase: obtain the full set of comments (volume, timestamps), commenter account profiles (follower counts, activity), likes-per-post, engagement rate trends, repetition/duplication of similar comments, and presence of bots/placeholder accounts. Based on the lone comment, assign a low fakeness score (20/100) but with modest confidence (40/100), and a cautious overall suitability score for advertising (30/100) with similar confidence (40/100)." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Praise / endorsement (supportive follower)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express gratitude and agreement with the influencer's advice; provides positive social proof and reinforcement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a brief, positive endorsement: 'Thanks for the tip... I will always follow your perfect tips.' It expresses agreement with the influencer's stance (that narrow lips are not attractive) and functions as social proof. Signals that suggest a genuine follower include direct reference to the post content and a natural-sounding short sentence. Signals that suggest possible inauthenticity include its generic praise, lack of personal detail, and short length — characteristics common to both real enthusiastic followers and generic/bot comments. Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions. Fakeness is judged moderately low (35/100) but with moderate uncertainty (60/100). For advertising decisions, this single comment gives weak positive evidence of audience support but is insufficient alone: evaluate overall comment volume, diversity of commenters, commenter account quality (age, followers, posts), engagement rate, and comment timing before committing. Overall suitability for advertising is moderate (55/100) with moderate confidence (50/100)." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine user request / content suggestion", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses interest in a specific makeup tutorial/service (business makeup for a photoshoot) and requests that content; signals engagement and potential buyer/consumer interest." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is in German ('Ein Business MakeUp für Fotoshooting würde mich interessieren. 😍') and reads as a straightforward, positive request for content or service — not promotional, not generic praise, and not clearly bot-like. The presence of an emoji and the specific phrasing indicate it is likely written by a real person interested in that topic. However, this is only one data point: while it signals niche relevance (audience interested in makeup for photoshoots) and some genuine engagement, it is insufficient to conclude broader audience quality or campaign suitability. For an advertising purchase decision, request more evidence of authentic engagement (multiple, varied comments, timestamps, follower quality, like-to-follower ratio, and comment author profile checks). Based on this lone comment the post shows modest positive organic interest but is not decisive for ad buy." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and support for the post; increase visible engagement. The comment is generic praise rather than product- or experience-specific feedback." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍\" is a short, emoji-rich positive reaction. Its generic wording and brevity are common both for genuine quick-fan reactions and for low-effort/fake (bot or engagement-pod) comments. Because only one comment is available, sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions; the generic nature raises some suspicion (hence a moderate fakeness score) but it could equally be a real follower expressing enthusiasm. For advertising decisions this single comment provides very weak evidence of authentic, purchase-intent audience engagement. Recommend collecting more data before buying ads: number and variety of comments, commenter account quality (age, followers, posting history), timing patterns, comment specificity, and overall engagement rate compared to follower count. If many comments are similarly generic, treat engagement as likely low-quality; if comments are specific and from credible accounts, confidence in the influencer's audience should increase." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking where the products are sold — indicates direct purchase interest and engagement with the post content." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment appears authentic: it is specific (asks where to buy), uses natural language and emojis, and signals purchase intent rather than generic praise. These features reduce the likelihood it's a bot or fake. However, assessment is limited by having only one comment and no metadata (commenter profile, timestamp patterns, volume of similar comments). For influencer advertising decisions this is a small positive signal (shows at least one follower is product-interested) but is insufficient on its own. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments for repetition/generic phrasing, check commenter account authenticity (age, activity, follower count), compute overall engagement rate, and inspect comment timestamps for unnatural bursts. Based on available information, fakeness is low (10/100) with moderate confidence; overall suitability for purchase is neutral-to-moderate (50/100) with limited confidence due to insufficient data." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji praise / generic positive comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval / social validation; increases visible engagement but provides no substantive feedback about the content" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment («👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön») is a short, emoji-heavy positive reaction. These are common both from genuine followers who want to show quick appreciation and from low-effort bot or engagement-farm accounts that post generic praise. Indicators that reduce confidence in authenticity: no content-specific text, heavy use of emojis, and brevity — all patterns often seen in inorganic comments. Indicators that could support authenticity: use of a language (German) that may match the influencer's audience. Given only one comment, the sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions. For advertising feasibility, this lone generic positive comment provides minimal evidence of a meaningful, engaged audience. I recommend analyzing a larger set of comments (diversity of content, account profiles, timestamps), overall engagement rate relative to follower count, follower quality, and reach demographics before deciding on ad purchase." }

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": 55, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / Question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used — direct product information request indicating purchase or replication intent." }, { "type": "Compliment / Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praising the color tones ('schöne warme Korallentöne') — signals positive sentiment toward the creator's styling." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is almost certainly genuine: natural German phrasing, polite tone, emoji, and a specific product question indicate a real viewer seeking actionable information (possible purchase intent). Fakeness is low (10/100) with high confidence because the comment content is specific and not generic promotional language commonly used by bots. However, this is only one comment — quantity is too small to judge overall audience engagement or authenticity across the account. For advertising decisions, this is a positive signal (real interest in products) but insufficient alone. Recommended next steps: review a larger sample of recent posts for similar product inquiries, total comment and like volumes, follower-to-engagement ratio, recurring questions about products, and audience demographic alignment before committing to ad spend." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "negative/critical", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express personal criticism of the post's tone/style (saying the post is not subtle). Likely genuine user feedback rather than promotional or bot content." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Dezent ist anders' (German: 'This is not subtle') is a brief negative critique about the post's style or presentation. It reads like a natural, language-specific reaction (correct grammar, concise opinion) and shows no signs of spam, excessive emoji, generic praise, or bot-like repetition. With only one comment provided, there is insufficient data to judge overall audience authenticity or sentiment trends. For advertising decisions you should obtain a larger sample of comments, engagement rates, follower quality, and sentiment distribution. Based on this single comment alone: low probability it's fake (fakeness_score 15), but the evidence base is limited, so confidence is moderate. The overall suitability for advertising is cautiously positive (score 60) because one critical comment does not indicate systemic problems, but the low data quantity prevents a high-confidence endorsement." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which products the influencer uses — information-seeking, potential purchase intent or interest in replicating the look/routine" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: a direct, language-appropriate question asking which products are used. This kind of comment typically indicates genuine interest and potential purchase intent (positive signal for advertiser relevance). However, the sample size is extremely small (n=1), so you cannot draw reliable conclusions about overall audience authenticity, engagement quality, or conversion likelihood from this alone. The low fakeness score reflects that the single comment appears natural rather than generic spam or bot-like. The overall advertising feasibility score is neutral (50) because while this comment is promising, there is insufficient evidence; further analysis is needed — examine a larger set of comments, commenter account quality (age, followers, posts), reply rate from the influencer, like-to-follower ratio, comment diversity, and temporal patterns to decide confidently whether to purchase advertising or a partnership." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative - appearance", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express personal dissatisfaction/critique about the influencer's appearance (eyebrows), likely to voice opinion and possibly provoke discussion or correction." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: \"Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....\" (German — \"The eyebrows are set too high...\"). The tone is brief and critical about appearance; it reads like an authentic follower remark rather than a templated/bot comment. Fakeness is assessed low (15/100) with moderate-high confidence because the text is specific and not generic praise or emoji spam. However, a single comment is insufficient to draw strong conclusions about overall audience quality or authenticity. For advertising feasibility: this single critical comment slightly raises risk for beauty or appearance-sensitive campaigns (audience may be candid/critical), but it is not decisive. I recommend analyzing the full comment set and metrics before purchase: distribution of positive vs negative comments, ratio of unique commenters to followers, repetition of templated comments, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and presence of suspicious short/generic comments. Based on the single data point, assign a cautious, below-average suitability score (40/100) with low confidence (30/100) until more data are provided." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "genuine question / information-seeking", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask for clarification about product effect (pore coverage) — indicates interest in product details and potential purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?”) appears authentic: concise, product-specific, natural German phrasing and not promotional or templated. It signals that a follower is actively engaging and wants clarification about how the product affects pore appearance — useful for advertisers in makeup/skincare as it shows topical interest and consideration. However, this is only one comment with no context (no info on total comment volume, likes, commenter credibility, reply pattern, or post content), so conclusions are limited. Recommend checking commenter account authenticity, volume and variety of comments, like-to-comment ratio, and presence of similar genuine queries before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 20, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Inquiry / Question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking for product information — indicates curiosity or purchase intent from a follower/potential customer." } ], "interpretation": "There is only a single comment: \"Was sind das für Produkte ?\" (What kind of products are these?). This is a direct informational question and appears authentic — not a generic compliment, emoji spam, or obvious bot template. With one short question we see low volume of engagement, so it's insufficient to judge overall audience quality. The low fakeness score reflects the comment's natural phrasing and intent. For an advertising decision, this data point is weak: it shows at least some interest but lacks depth (no follow-up, likes, or multiple similar comments). Recommend collecting more context before buying ads: number of comments per post, comment author profiles (real accounts vs. new/empty), timing patterns, comment likes/replies, and engagement rate relative to follower count." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only (hearts)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/affection and register engagement. Low-effort interaction that can come from genuine followers, engagement pods, or automated/batch accounts; provides little qualitative signal about audience interest." } ], "interpretation": "There is only a single comment ('❤️❤️❤️'), which is a low-information, emoji-only reaction. Emoji-only comments are common, easy to produce at scale, and frequently appear in both genuine and inauthentic engagement. Given the lack of variety, meaningful text, or multiple commenters, the comment set provides weak evidence of a real, engaged audience. Fakeness is assessed as moderately likely (score 65) but with limited confidence because the sample is tiny. For advertising purchase decisions, this single comment is insufficient to judge audience quality. Recommended next steps: inspect a larger sample of recent comments for diversity and content (questions, specifics, tagged friends), check commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, profile pictures, posting history), compare comment-to-like ratios, and look for repeated identical comments across posts. Based on the current evidence, I would rate the influencer as low-to-moderate suitability for ad spend (overall score 30) until further engagement authenticity checks are performed." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation / simple positive engagement (boosts visible sentiment and engagement metrics)" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: \"Richtig schön\" (German for \"really/very beautiful\"). This is a short, generic positive compliment. As a standalone signal it indicates positive sentiment but provides little information about audience depth, authenticity, or commercial interest. The comment could be genuine (typical follower praise) or generic (bot/template) — there are no markers here (no emojis, no tagging, no question, no specificity) to strongly classify it. Given the extremely small sample, the assessment must be cautious: fakeness likelihood is modest but uncertain (fakeness_score 30, confidence 40). For advertising feasibility the comments sample is insufficient: a single generic praise does not demonstrate an engaged, brand-receptive community, nor does it show conversational comments, repeat commenters, or purchase intent. Overall suitability for ad spend is therefore low–moderate (overall_score 35) with limited confidence (45). Recommendations: collect a larger sample of comments and metadata before deciding — examine commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, posting behavior), comment timestamps (burst patterns), comment variety (questions, personal stories, tagged friends), comment-to-like ratio, and the presence of repeated or templated phrases across posts. Also review replies and saved/bookmarked indicators if available. These checks will substantially raise assessment confidence." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction / low-effort praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Quick expression of enthusiasm or approval; increases visible engagement but provides little informational value about genuine interest or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment contains only three fire emojis — a low-effort positive reaction. Emoji-only comments are ambiguous: they can be genuine quick reactions from real followers or produced by bots/engagement farms to inflate visible engagement. As a result, this comment is a weak signal for audience authenticity or ad-readiness. For advertising decisions, rely on fuller indicators (meaningful text comments, diversity of commenters, consistent engagement rate, follower quality and audience demographics). Recommend collecting a larger sample of comments and performing commenter profile checks and engagement-rate analysis before purchasing." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "defensive/supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defends the subject against personal criticism and redirects the conversation to the post's topical focus (makeup technique); expresses a genuine opinion and engagement." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as a genuine, human reaction: it pushes back against a personal critique (mention of Botox) and emphasizes that the post is about makeup technique. Linguistic cues (colloquial phrasing, a short rhetorical question, and an emphatic refocus) are consistent with organic user behavior rather than bot-like copy-paste comments. However, this is only one data point — it indicates at least some topical, engaged audience but does not allow robust conclusions about overall comment authenticity or community sentiment. For ad-buy decisions, this comment is mildly positive (audience defends content focus), but you should request a larger sample of comments, timing/like patterns, reply chains, and follower quality before relying on this as evidence of strong, authentic engagement." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Provide social proof and positive reinforcement of the transformation/result; supports influencer credibility." }, { "type": "Specific observational praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Mentions concrete elements (hairstyle, clothing, appearing 'wacher, frischer, jugendlicher') which functions as a mild testimonial validating the visual result." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment is positive and fairly specific (notes hairstyle and clothing, and describes the subject as more awake/fresh/younger). That specificity makes it more likely to be genuine or from an engaged follower rather than a generic bot-like praise. Fakeness risk appears low-to-moderate (20/100) but confidence is only moderate because only one comment is available. For advertising feasibility the signal is mildly positive — the comment acts as social proof and a small testimonial, which helps conversion. However, one comment is insufficient to judge overall community engagement or authenticity. Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: analyze a larger sample of comments (diversity, timing, language patterns), inspect commenter profiles (real accounts, profile photos, posting history, follower counts), check like-to-comment ratio and overall engagement rate, and look for repeated templated comments across posts. Based on this single comment alone I give a cautious, moderate suitability score (55/100) with limited confidence." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive compliment / emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval and enthusiasm (engagement). Functions as social reinforcement for the poster; may increase perceived popularity. Could be genuine follower praise or a generic/low-effort comment from a casual user or bot." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" (\"Looks great\"). This is a short, positive, emoji-rich compliment. Such comments commonly appear from real followers but are also frequently produced by low-effort accounts or automated engagement services because they are generic and non-specific. Given the extremely small sample (one comment), any judgment is highly uncertain. I assessed moderate-low fakeness (25%) because the language and emojis are typical of genuine praise, but the lack of specificity and context raises the possibility of generic or inauthentic engagement. For advertising purchase feasibility the evidence is insufficient (overall score 30/100) — one positive comment does not demonstrate a reliable, engaged, targetable audience. Recommended next steps before making ad-buy decisions: obtain the full comment set and timestamps, analyze commenter account quality (followers, posting history, profile completeness), measure likes-to-comments ratio and engagement rate across multiple posts, look for repetitive or templated comments, check geographic/language consistency with the influencer’s claimed audience, and examine follower growth/engagement anomalies. With that additional data a more confident assessment can be provided." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic positive reaction (short text + emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/affection and provide low-effort engagement; can be genuine fan reaction or generic bot/comment-farm output intended to inflate visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Wow 😍' is a very short, generic positive reaction. Such comments are common from real followers but are also frequently produced by bots or engagement farms because they require no contextual knowledge and are reusable across posts. With only one example, the signal is weak: this does not demonstrate audience specificity, meaningful product interest, or conversational engagement. For advertising-feasibility decisions this comment provides little confidence in authentic influence. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments for repetition of identical short phrases/emojis, inspect commenter profiles (age, activity, follower counts, posting history, profile photos), check comment timing patterns (many similar comments posted quickly), and compare comment-to-like ratio and overall engagement rate versus follower size. If many comments look similar to this one, increase suspicion of inauthentic engagement and lower ad investment; if most comments are personalized and from credible accounts, re-evaluate positively." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "mention/tag", "count": 1, "purpose": "To draw a specific user's attention to the post (share with a friend) or to promote/redirect traffic to another account; can also be used by bots/spam networks to create low-effort engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is provided and it consists solely of a username mention (@rukiyevizercimen). This gives very little signal about genuine audience interest or sentiment. Mention-only comments are common for organic friend-sharing but are also frequently produced by low-effort engagement tactics (tag-bots, comment pods, or paid tag-for-tag activity). With just this one comment, the likelihood of inauthentic engagement is non-trivial, but the confidence is low because we lack context (commenter profile, timing, frequency of similar comments, post likes, and other comments). For advertising feasibility: this single tag is weak evidence of a responsive, purchase-ready audience. Recommendation: inspect the commenter account (followers, activity, language, profile age), check for repeated mentions across multiple posts, analyze overall comment composition on the influencer’s recent posts, and evaluate like-to-comment ratios before making an ad buy decision." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "appreciation / gratitude", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express thanks and positive reaction to the post (emotional/engagement signal)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍”) is a short, emoji-rich German-language thank-you — typical of an engaged follower responding positively. It reads as low-effort but authentic rather than clearly botlike or spammy. However, this is only one comment: sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall comment quality or authenticity on the account. There are no obvious red flags in the text (no generic promo-speak, no link, natural language), but assessing fakeness reliably would require additional data: commenter profile (age, follower/following counts, posting history), timestamps (burst/repeat patterns), distribution of similar comments across posts, like-to-comment ratios, and the broader comment mix. Given current limited evidence, the fakeness estimate is low-to-moderate risk; overall suitability for advertising is undecided — the comment is positive but insufficient to justify a purchase decision without further metrics (engagement rate, audience demographics, more comment samples)." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "supportive/affirmation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement and positive reinforcement (short praise), increases visible engagement and signals audience approval." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr' is a brief, natural-sounding supportive remark in German. It appears organic and low-risk for being fake (hence a low fakeness score), but it is generic and provides little depth about audience intent or product interest. Because this is only one comment, the sample size is far too small to draw reliable conclusions about overall audience quality or campaign suitability. For advertising-buy decisions you need more data: total comment volume and diversity, like-to-follower ratio, timing of comments, presence of questions or purchase intent, follower audit for bots, and sentiment distribution. Based on this lone comment, the post shows a small sign of genuine engagement but not enough evidence to confidently recommend an ad buy." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (applause)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Generic praise/approval and simple engagement to boost visible activity; low informational value and often low-effort (could be genuine fan, engagement-pod member, or bot)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a string of applause emojis (\"👏👏👏👏\"). Emoji-only comments are common and serve to register positive sentiment and increase visible engagement, but they provide no substantive feedback about content or purchase intent. Such comments are low-effort and therefore have a higher chance of being non-organic (engagement pods or automated accounts), though they can also come from genuine followers. With only one short, generic comment available, confidence in whether engagement is authentic is limited. For advertising decisions, this single data point is insufficient — request a larger sample of comments, commenter profile checks (follower counts, activity), comment timing, and overall engagement metrics (likes, saves, reach) before taking action." }

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": 60, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product endorsement / testimonial", "count": 1, "purpose": "Recommend a specific product (tagged @ohganicals) and share personal positive experience for makeup removal." }, { "type": "personal anecdote / social engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Share a personal feeling (would like to approach women with that eyeliner but is shy) to connect with the poster/audience." }, { "type": "engagement with post content", "count": 1, "purpose": "React to the makeup technique shown (comment about the way kajal is applied), keeping conversation on-topic." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as plausibly genuine: it contains a small personal anecdote, an emoji, and a specific product mention with a brief testimonial rather than a generic praise phrase. The tagged brand could be an organic shout-out or a subtle influencer/affiliate mention, but there is no explicit call-to-action, link, repeated template language, or obvious bot patterns. Given only one comment to analyze, I rate fakeness low (20) but with moderate confidence because a larger sample of comments and commenter profiles is needed to be certain. For advertising feasibility: this comment signals an audience that discusses beauty products and trusts peer recommendations, which is a positive indicator for beauty-related ads—hence an overall feasibility score of 70. Recommended next steps before purchase: review more comments for repetition or copy-paste patterns, inspect commenter accounts (age, activity, follower counts) to detect coordinated behavior, check overall engagement rate on the post and historical conversion metrics from past campaigns." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive endorsement / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Agreement and praise; social proof that supports the influencer's message (reinforces credibility and encourages others)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, \"Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏\", is a short, positive endorsement in German. It functions as supportive social-proof rather than a question, request, or direct promotion. Linguistically it reads naturally (minor punctuation omission), uses emojis, and contains no link or obvious templated phrasing. This makes it more likely to be authentic or a low-effort follower comment rather than a clear bot or purchased message. However, with only one comment provided, the sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall audience quality. There is no sign of spam, solicitations, or repeated generic patterns here, but such a single positive remark could also be part of a batch of similar comments if the account uses engagement pods or purchased comments—there is insufficient evidence either way. For advertising decisions, this single comment is a weak positive signal: it shows some follower agreement but does not demonstrate depth of engagement (no specifics, questions, or conversation). Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: analyze a larger set of recent comments, check commenter profiles for real accounts (posting history, follower counts, avatars), compare likes-to-followers ratio, look for repeated comment text across posts, and inspect timing patterns for bot-like behavior." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "positive engagement / expressing approval; increases visible engagement but provides no substantive endorsement or purchase intent" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: \"Супер 👍\" (\"Super 👍\"). This is a very short, generic positive reaction. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort accounts. With a single example the sample size is insufficient to make a high-confidence judgment. The moderate fakeness score reflects the ambiguous nature of brief generic praise; confidence is low because we lack context (commenter profile, volume and diversity of other comments, timing, like-to-comment ratio). For advertising decisions this comment provides almost no evidence of meaningful audience enthusiasm or conversion intent. Recommendation: collect more comments across multiple posts, inspect commenter accounts (activity, follower counts, avatars, language consistency), check for repeated phrases across posts, and compare likes vs comments before deciding on ad spend." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive sentiment and personal praise toward the influencer (social support, affirmation)." }, { "type": "Emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Non-verbal positive engagement to amplify the compliment and show enthusiasm." }, { "type": "Personal address / familiar form", "count": 1, "purpose": "Directly addresses the influencer by a diminutive name (Инночка), indicating a follower who knows or feels familiar with them." } ], "interpretation": "Комментарий короткий и позитивный: «Инночка, красотка» с эмоциональными эмодзи — типичный лайк-замещающий комментарий от подписчика. Ничего коммерческого или спамного в тексте нет; форма обращения (д diminutive «Инночка») повышает вероятность реального, личного подписчика, а не бот‑генерированного сообщения. На основании единственного комментария делать выводы об общем качестве аудитории или степени подлинности аккаунта нельзя. Для решения по размещению рекламы нужна большая выборка комментариев, соотношение лайков/комментариев, число уникальных комментаторов, временная динамика комментариев и демография подписчиков. Текущий единичный комментарий — позитивный сигнал, но слишком мал для принятия рекламного решения." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji applause", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses approval/celebration; low-effort engagement intended to show support or provide social proof without substantive content." } ], "interpretation": "The available comments consist of a single low-effort emoji (👏👏). Such comments are common among genuine followers as quick positive reactions, but they are also typical of low-quality or purchased engagement (bots or mass accounts) because they require minimal effort and convey no context. Given only one comment, this sample is too small to draw strong conclusions. I rate the fakeness as moderately suspicious (45/100) with low-to-moderate confidence (40/100) and the overall suitability for advertising as low-to-moderate (30/100) with low confidence (35/100). Recommended next steps before any ad purchase: analyze a larger sample of comments for diversity and substance, check commenter account quality (profiles, follower counts, posting history), inspect timing patterns for bursts of similar comments, compare likes-to-comments ratio to norms for the influencer's niche, and review reposts/mentions and audience demographics." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "question / information-seeking", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking about event timing and directions (logistics/attendance intent)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“Ist es nicht heute? wenn ja, wie komm ich dahin?”) reads as a genuine, specific follower question about event timing and how to get there. It indicates real user interest and potential intent to attend, which is a positive engagement signal for an influencer. However, one comment alone is insufficient to judge overall audience authenticity or ad-fit. There are no obvious bot signatures (generic praise, excessive emojis, copy-paste phrasing, or promotional links), but lack of profile metadata and additional comments prevents strong conclusions. Recommendation: review larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (age, follower counts, activity), comment timestamps, repetition patterns, and overall engagement rate before making an advertising purchase decision." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval and provide lightweight social proof; increases visible engagement but conveys little substantive feedback (could be genuine casual reaction or generic/bot engagement)." } ], "interpretation": "The sole comment \"🔥🔥🔥\" is a generic positive reaction that offers almost no audience insight on its own. Emoji-only comments are common from real followers as quick praise, but they are also frequently used by automated or low-effort fake accounts to inflate engagement. Given a single comment, I rate the likelihood of fakeness as moderate (45) with low confidence (30) because there is insufficient context (no commenter metadata, no timing, no distribution of comment types). For advertising-purchase feasibility the signal is weak: this comment provides minimal evidence of an engaged, relevant audience. Overall recommendation: do not base a buy decision on this alone (overall score 40, confidence 25). To improve assessment, examine the full comment set and commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, profile photos, comment diversity, repeated identical comments/emojis, timestamps), post-level engagement rates (likes, saves, reach), audience demographics, and past sponsored post performance." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short praise with emojis", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/appreciation and provide quick positive social proof (engagement boosting)" } ], "interpretation": "Single comment: \"Unglaublich 👏👏👏\" (German for \"Unbelievable\" with clapping emojis). This is a short, generic positive reaction that functions primarily as social proof. Such comments are common from real followers as quick spontaneous praise, but they are also the type most easily mimicked by bots or paid engagement (single-word superlatives + emojis). Given only one comment and no account/profile context, certainty is low. Recommendation: do not rely on this alone when judging influencer quality for advertising. Check commenter account authenticity (age, follower/following ratio, post history), look for repetition of identical comments across multiple posts, measure comment-to-follower ratio and diversity of comment content across the influencer’s posts, and analyze likes, saves, story interactions and conversion metrics. Based on this single sample, engagement quality is uncertain — mildly positive signal but insufficient to conclude strong genuine community engagement." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short emoji praise (fire emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval; low informational value. Commonly used by genuine followers to signal liking or by low-effort/bot accounts to simulate engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). Emoji-only comments are ambiguous: they can be quick genuine reactions from real followers but are also frequently produced by engagement farms or bots because they require no contextual knowledge. With a sample size of one comment there is insufficient evidence to judge the overall authenticity or quality of the influencer's audience. The fakeness_score (60) reflects a tilt toward suspicious/generic engagement given the emoji-only content, but the confidence is low (40) because a single comment is not informative. For advertising decisions, this signal is weak: emoji comments offer little insight into conversion potential, audience intent, or topical relevance. I recommend requesting additional data before buying ads: total likes, follower count and growth history, number of comments per post and diversity of commenters, timestamps (to check for bursts), commenter profile audits (repeated accounts, incomplete profiles), story views, reach/impressions, audience demographics, and a larger random sample of comments (e.g., 50–100). Based on the available evidence, do not proceed with purchase solely on this comment; require the metrics above and perform a follower/comment authenticity audit first." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Acknowledgment / Transactional", "count": 1, "purpose": "A short confirmation ('Erledigt' = 'Done'). Likely used to confirm a completed action (entry to a giveaway, task done, payment processed, or admin request). Provides little value as engagement and may be either genuine follower response or scripted/bot reply." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single, one-word German comment ('Erledigt') is present. This yields very low informational value about audience sentiment, interest, or engagement quality. The comment fits the pattern of transactional confirmations rather than meaningful interaction (no praise, no question, no product-related detail). Because it is brief and generic, it could be a genuine quick reply to a call-to-action or a routine/system message, or it could be an automated/bulk response — there is insufficient context to distinguish confidently. For advertising-feasibility decisions this comment alone is weak evidence of an engaged, authentic community. Recommended next steps before buying ads: review the full comment set on multiple posts for diversity and depth, inspect commenter profiles (real-looking accounts, follower counts, posting history), check like-to-comment ratios, timing/velocity of comments, and look for repetitive or templated replies. Based only on this comment, I rate the post's comment-quality and authenticity as low (overall_score 30) with moderate uncertainty (confidence 40)." }

Text: ❤️ hast du ein Video für tief liegenden Augen? 🙏♥️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / content request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks the creator for a tutorial/video for deep-set eyes — indicates genuine interest in specific content." }, { "type": "Positive/engagement emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Uses hearts and prayer emoji to show appreciation and encouragement, increasing apparent authenticity and positive engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a natural-language, topic-specific request in German asking for a video for deep-set eyes and includes positive emojis. This pattern (direct content request + encouraging emojis) is typical of genuine followers rather than generic bot comments. Fakeness risk is low (estimated 10/100) but the confidence is moderate because this judgment is based on one comment only. For advertising feasibility: the comment indicates relevant audience interest (beauty/makeup, eye-related content), which is favorable for advertisers in that niche. However, one comment is insufficient to judge overall engagement quality or reach. Recommended next steps before purchase: analyze a larger sample of recent comments for repetition patterns, look at like-to-follower ratio, comment diversity, follower demographics, and prior sponsored content engagement to confirm authenticity and alignment with target customers." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Text: +

Text: +

Text: Und weiss du mein make up heute erinnert mich an mich😍😅 ich möchte mich immer dezent schminken wie bei deine rechte Seite- zart, süß und als Ergebnis bekomme ich doch wie deine linke, ausdrucksvoll und heiß 😅😅😅

Text: Liebe Ina , das war wieder mal ein schöner Abend mit dir 😊.Danke 🙂

Text: Sehr schön 💕

Text: Liebe Ina, ich kann ja leider mittwochs nie live dabei sein, aber schaue mir im Nachhinein immer Deine Videos an. Du hast Dich wieder wunderschön geschminkt.Virken Dank, dass Du die Videos immer abspeicherst, damit man sich die später noch anschauen kann. Liebe Grüße, Britta🫶😘

Text: +

Text: Es war ein toller Abend. Jedes Mal lernt man was neues 🔥😍vielen Dank liebe Ina 🫶🥰

Text: War ein sehr schöner Abend ❤️

Text: War super wie immer❤️❤️dankeschön!!

Text: Mittwochs Live 20:00 Uhr ist Pflicht mittlerweile 🤩 Vielen lieben Dank für deine Mühe Liebe Ina 🫶🏻

Text: Ina du bist die beste ! 😍

Text: Vielen lieben Dank liebe Ina😘 ohne große Hoffnung mache ich bei Gewinnspielen mit, weil ich ja kaum was gewinne, aber heute hab ich gewonnen 🏅 ich freue mich rieeewsig

Text: Was ist das für eine schöne Farbe? Wo gibt es die!!!

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / positive sentiment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive reaction to the product/post (builds social proof)." }, { "type": "product inquiry / purchase intent", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks where to obtain the item — indicates real interest and potential conversion opportunity." }, { "type": "spam / promotional / generic bot", "count": 0, "purpose": "No signs of generic one‑word spam, repeated promotional messages, or obvious bot behaviour in the given comment." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was ist das für eine schöne Farbe? Wo gibt es die!!!') is a natural, specific question expressing admiration and asking where to buy — a strong sign of genuine engagement and potential purchase intent. Linguistic cues (language match, specific inquiry, absence of generic praise or irrelevant links) point toward a real follower rather than an automated or fake comment. However, this assessment is based on only one comment; the sample size is too small to generalize about the influencer's overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising decisions, this single data point is positive but insufficient. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of recent comments for patterns (variety of unique commenters, recurring accounts, timing), check engagement rate vs. follower count, inspect commenter profiles for real accounts vs. bot indicators, and look for coordinated comment pods or incentivized replies. Based on the current limited evidence, the post shows a promising sign (real interest) but does not provide enough confidence alone to make a buying decision." }