Job: @beauty_by_ina_heinrich

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic positive praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses appreciation/approval ('Very informative'). Likely intended to signal engagement and positive reception; low informational value and commonly used to inflate apparent engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: 'Sehr informativ' (German for 'Very informative'). This is a short, generic positive remark. Such comments can be genuine but are also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort followers because they are non-specific and easily reused across posts. Given the minimal sample size, there is insufficient evidence of authentic, engaged audience interaction (no questions, no detailed feedback, no personal references, no brand mentions). For advertising decisions, this lone generic comment is weak evidence of high-quality organic engagement. Recommend gathering more data: total comments, comment diversity (languages, specificity), comment timing relative to post, ratio of comments to followers, presence of replies/conversation, and other posts' comment patterns before proceeding with a purchase. Current assessment: borderline — some positive signal but insufficient proof of authentic, valuable engagement." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction (heart)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express support/liking; low informational content. Commonly used by genuine followers as quick affirmation but also easy for bots/engagement pods to produce." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it is a solitary heart emoji. This provides very limited signal: it indicates some level of engagement but no substantive conversation, question, or product interest. Heart-only comments are ambiguous — they can be genuine quick reactions from real followers, but they are also the easiest type of engagement to generate automatically or via coordinated engagement groups. Given the minimal sample, I rate the comment-level fakeness as moderately high (60) but with low confidence (40) because one short emoji is inherently ambiguous. For advertising feasibility the evidence here is weak (overall score 35, confidence 35): you cannot rely on a single heart comment to demonstrate an engaged, brand-responsive audience. Recommended next steps: inspect a larger sample of recent posts for comment diversity and depth, compute comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios, look for repeated/similar comments (bot pattern), examine saves/shares/story interactions, and request audience demographics or previous ad performance metrics before a buy decision." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive praise / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation for content (short praise with emojis). Purpose can be genuine engagement from a follower, simple social reinforcement, or a low-effort comment intended to increase visibility/engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment: 'Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍' is a short, positive, emoji-rich compliment. With only one comment provided, the sample is too small for a strong conclusion. Characteristics suggest it could be a genuine follower expressing appreciation, but it is also consistent with low-effort or automated engagement (generic wording, no specific detail about the content). Fakeness score is modest (30) reflecting the ambiguity: not strongly indicative of bot behavior, but not clearly organic either. Overall score for comment quality and usefulness for assessing influencer suitability is below average (45) because a single generic praise comment provides limited evidence of real audience engagement or meaningful interaction. Recommendation: analyze a larger set of comments and the commenter accounts (look for profile completeness, posting history, follower/following ratios, comment variety, repetition across posts, timing patterns) to raise confidence and refine the fakeness and suitability assessment for advertising decisions." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / positive praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which lipstick is used, express admiration for the color — signals interest and possible purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a direct product question in German with positive sentiment ('wunderschön', 'ich mag solche Farbe') and a polite thank-you. Linguistic imperfections ('Was ist das von einer Lippenstift?') suggest a casual human commenter rather than a templated bot; there are no spammy elements (no links, tags, emojis repeated, or generic one-word praise). Based on this comment alone the fakeness likelihood is low (score 20) but confidence is moderate because the sample size is one and isolated comments are unreliable indicators of overall authenticity. For advertising decisions this is a mildly positive signal: the audience includes at least some engaged users asking about products — useful for beauty/lipstick campaigns. However, I recommend further checks before purchase: examine a larger sample of comments across recent posts, reviewer profiles (age, follower counts, posting history), comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, top-commenter diversity, and whether the influencer answers product questions. These additional checks will raise confidence in influencer quality and conversion potential." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 55, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic compliment / positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses simple positive sentiment and social approval (engagement). Low informational value for advertisers beyond signaling likability." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: \"Schöne Farbe 😍\" (German: \"Nice color\"). This is a short, generic compliment with an emoji. Such comments are common from genuine followers but are also frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort audience members. Given the limited sample size, the uncertainty is high. The moderate fakeness score reflects that the comment lacks specificity (no reference to product, experience, or account), which is a common marker of inauthentic or low-quality engagement, but it could equally be a legitimate spontaneous reaction from a German-speaking follower. For an advertising purchase decision, this single comment is insufficient evidence of a healthy, authentic community. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments for repetition and diversity of language and content, check commenter profiles (real accounts vs. suspicious: few posts, default profile, usernames with many numbers), look at timing patterns (many comments posted in short bursts), ratio of comments-to-followers and likes-to-followers, presence of meaningful, product-specific comments, and compare to previous posts. If many comments on the influencer are similarly generic and from low-quality profiles, treat engagement as likely inflated and reduce trust in organic reach; if comments are varied and include detailed feedback, trust increases. Based on only this single comment, the post's comment quality appears ambiguous-to-low for advertising purposes." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/appreciative", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses gratitude and positive feedback to the influencer (social endorsement, engagement; likely intended to encourage or thank the poster)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment—\"Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️\"—reads as a brief, positive thank-you with a heart emoji and direct mention of the influencer's name. Linguistically it is natural and typical of genuine follower replies (minor grammatical inaccuracy does not imply automation). Based on content and format, the comment is likely authentic, hence a low fakeness score (10). However, this assessment has moderate confidence because it is based on one isolated comment. For advertising feasibility, one positive comment is a small positive signal but insufficient alone. Recommended next checks before purchase: volume and variety of comments, commenter account authenticity (profile age, follower counts, posting history), timing patterns (many comments posted very quickly can indicate inorganic activity), like-to-comment ratios, and presence of conversation or specific references to content. If the rest of the comment set shows similar natural, varied engagement from identifiable accounts, the influencer becomes a stronger candidate. If most comments are repetitive, generic, or from newly created accounts, reassess and lower the advertising suitability 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": 80, "overall_score": 78, "overall_confidence": 75, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment + content request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback (praise for manicure/hands) combined with a request for more information about hand care — indicates interest in related content and encourages further engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a specific, topic-relevant compliment in German and includes a clear request for more content about hand care. This specificity (mentions manicure and hands) and the polite, multi-sentence phrasing reduce the likelihood it is a generic bot or paid fake comment. Fakeness is low (15/100) with fairly high confidence because the language is natural and context-specific, but confidence is not maximal due to the very small sample (only one comment). For advertising feasibility: this comment signals an engaged audience interested in beauty/hand-care topics, which is positive for brands in that category. Overall assessment score is 78/100 with moderate-high confidence; however, this recommendation is based on one comment only. I recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments (volume, timing, repetition, sentiment), the influencer's follower quality, engagement rate, and any patterns of repetitive or generic replies before finalizing an advertising buy." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 80, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry + compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine follower asking which product (eyesahdow) was used while also giving positive feedback; indicates purchase interest and engagement potential." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (“Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍”) reads as an authentic follower question combined with a compliment. It expresses specific interest in the product used (high commercial intent for a cosmetics ad) and uses a positive emoji, which is typical of organic engagement. The information available is extremely limited (one comment), so while this example looks genuine and valuable for advertising purposes (signals interest and potential conversion), the sample size limits confidence. Recommendation: review a larger sample of comments, check commenter profiles (age, follower count, activity), reply rate from the influencer, and overall engagement rate to confirm authenticity before purchasing ads or collaborations." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / critique", "count": 1, "purpose": "A follower asking whether the poster's lips are overdrawn/overmade-up — expresses curiosity and mild skepticism, invites a response from the influencer." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided (German: \"Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?\"). It reads as a direct, specific question about the influencer's makeup rather than a generic compliment, emoji, or promotional message. That pattern suggests the comment is likely genuine (low fakeness score), but the sample is too small to draw robust conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising-feasibility decisions this single comment is weak evidence: it indicates some real engagement and topical interest (beauty/makeup), but does not show volume, diversity, sentiment distribution, or indicators of inorganic behavior (repeated generic comments, obvious bot language, many one-word replies, suspicious accounts). Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts, check commenter account activity and profiles (real names, photos, follower counts, posting frequency), look at like-to-comment ratios and timing patterns, and search for repeated texts or clustered commenting that would indicate inauthentic engagement." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive sentiment/approval with minimal effort; often used by genuine followers but also by low-effort bot/spam accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available and it is a single heart emoji (\"❤️\"). This is a generic positive reaction that indicates some level of engagement but provides no substantive feedback, intent to purchase, or conversational depth. Emoji-only comments are common from real followers as quick praise, but they are also easy for bots or purchased-engagement networks to produce, so fakeness cannot be ruled out. Given the minimal sample size, confidence in any strong conclusion is limited. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this single emoji comment is insufficient evidence of an engaged, authentic audience. Recommended next steps: collect a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, examine like counts and engagement rate relative to follower count, check diversity and profiles of commenters (age, follower counts, account age), look for repeated short comments from many accounts, and inspect comment timestamps for unnatural clustering. Based on the available data, treat the post as weak evidence of meaningful audience engagement." }

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": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment with self-deprecating relatability", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the influencer's appearance, create rapport/relatability, and boost engagement (uses emojis to reinforce positive tone). Not a direct purchase inquiry or call-to-action." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Ich hab nicht Mal genug Lippe um sie voller zu schminken 😂 aber bei dir schaut alles super aus 😍\") reads as a genuine, organic compliment. The commenter compares themselves to the influencer in a self-deprecating, playful way and praises the influencer's look. There are no giveaway signs of bot-like behaviour: language is specific, uses humor and emojis, and contains no generic marketing phrasing or repeated hashtags. However, this is only one comment — it indicates positive sentiment and some follower engagement but provides no evidence of purchase intent, product interest, or a pattern of high-quality engagement across the account. For an advertising decision this single comment is mildly supportive but insufficient on its own. Recommended next steps: examine a larger sample of recent comments for repetition, check commenter profiles for real-account signals (profile pic, posting history, follower ratio), measure comment-to-follower ratio and comment diversity, and look for comments asking about products/pricing or linking to conversions. Based on this single comment, the audience authenticity appears likely genuine (low fakeness), but more data is needed before confidently approving the influencer for ad spend." }

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": 7, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Constructive criticism / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Provide specific feedback about the creator's technique and ask for clarification or help; engagement from an apparently interested follower seeking practical advice." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment appears genuine: it is specific (mentions viewing 'up close' and 'painting further out'), includes a question asking whether the commenter is doing something wrong, and uses natural phrasing and punctuation. These features make it unlikely to be a bot or generic promotional comment. Because there is only one comment available, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall audience quality. For advertising feasibility, this comment signals an engaged, detail-oriented follower who may convert well for product or tutorial-related promotions, but you should analyze a larger set of comments, engagement rate (likes/comments per follower), reply behavior, and sentiment distribution before deciding. Recommendation: collect at least several dozen comments across multiple recent posts and check for patterns (repeated generic praise, emoji-only comments, or repeated copy-paste text) to better detect inauthentic activity." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment / positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short praise referencing appearance (\"full lips\"). Likely meant as a compliment or a positive reaction to the visual content; low-effort so could be genuine fan reaction or a generic comment." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment was provided: \"Volle Lippen\" (German: \"full lips\"). This is most consistent with a brief positive remark about appearance — a compliment or expression of admiration. However, single-word/phrase comments are low-effort and therefore ambiguous: they can be genuine quick reactions, recurring generic comments from bots, or even repeated by engagement farms. With one comment there is insufficient data to reliably judge authenticity or overall audience quality. Fakeness likelihood is assessed as low-to-moderate (25) but with low confidence because the sample is tiny. For advertising feasibility, this single comment neither supports nor refutes strong audience engagement — overall suitability score is low (35) chiefly due to lack of data. Recommended next steps before buying advertising: collect a larger sample of comments, examine commenter profiles (follower counts, activity, language consistency), check comment timing and repetition patterns, and compute engagement metrics (likes, comments per follower). Consider running a small paid test to validate real conversions and audience responsiveness." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses positive sentiment toward the influencer and the advice given (social validation)." }, { "type": "Generic / Likely engagement-boost comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short, broadly flattering message with no specific detail about the post — commonly used to increase visible engagement; could be from a bot, engagement farm, or an inattentive follower." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads: \"Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.\" — a briefly phrased, strongly positive message with minor grammatical mistakes and no specific reference to the post content. That combination (generic praise, absolute language, lack of detail) is characteristic of low-effort genuine comments or automated/paid engagement. Because you provided only one comment, sample size is very small; this reduces confidence in any conclusion. Based on tone and format, I rate the comment as moderately likely to be inauthentic (fakeness 65/100, confidence 60/100). For advertising decisions, the available comments provide weak evidence of a genuine, engaged audience: overall feasibility score 45/100 with moderate uncertainty (confidence 50/100). Recommendation: request a larger sample of recent comments, check commenter account profiles (age, posting frequency, follower-to-following ratio, language consistency), and examine like-to-comment ratios and distribution across posts before deciding on purchase." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Interest / Request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks for a 'business makeup for photoshoot' — a direct content request indicating interest in a specific service/topic; serves as product/content feedback and potential demand signal." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is written in natural German with an emoji and a clear, specific request — characteristics that point to a genuine follower rather than an automated/bot message. This is a positive engagement signal because it shows topical interest (makeup for photoshoots) that could align with relevant advertising/sponsorships. However, one comment is a very small sample: volume, diversity of commenters, timing, like-to-comment ratios, commenter profiles and follower overlap must be reviewed before making advertising decisions. Recommendation: treat this as a favorable qualitative signal but obtain a larger sample (more comments, commenter account checks) and metrics (engagement rate, audience demographics) to increase confidence in purchasing ads or collaborations." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic praise / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive sentiment to show approval and increase visible engagement (short praise + emoji). Often used to boost post appeal or as a quick supportive response." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short, positive comment in German (\"Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍\") is available. This is a generic compliment with an emoji — a common authentic reaction but also the type frequently produced by bots, engagement pods, or low-effort followers. With only this single data point, assessment uncertainty is high. I rate the comment's fakeness moderately possible (45) because of its brevity and generic wording, but confidence is low (30) due to lack of context (no commenter profile info, no timestamps, no comment volume/diversity, no like counts). Overall feasibility for advertising based on comments alone is low (35) with low confidence (25). Recommendation: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple posts, check commenter account quality (age, follower ratios, posting history), look for repeated/similar phrasing across posts, timing patterns, and like-to-comment ratios before making an advertising purchase decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive inquiry / purchase intent", "count": 1, "purpose": "User expresses admiration and asks where the products can be purchased — indicates interest in buying and seeks actionable information." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏') reads as a genuine user inquiry: positive reaction plus direct question about product availability. Use of natural language (German), emoji and polite phrasing suggests a real person rather than a templated bot reply. However, this is only one comment — sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising-feasibility: this comment shows product interest (a positive signal), but low comment volume and lack of additional engagement/context limit confidence. Recommended next steps before purchase: review larger sample of recent comments, check diversity and profiles of commenters (account age, follower counts, follower-to-following ratios), examine like-to-comment ratio and comment timestamps for patterns of inorganic activity, and request the influencer's engagement metrics (reach, saves, clicks)." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive/Compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration or approval of the post (social endorsement)." }, { "type": "Low-effort emoji + short text", "count": 1, "purpose": "Quick, lightweight engagement — often from casual followers or automated/bot accounts; signals positive reaction but little informational value." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön\" is a positive, low-effort reaction: emojis plus a short German compliment ('very beautiful'). This pattern is common for genuine casual followers but is also typical of generic or automated comments because it lacks personalization (no name, question, detail). Given only one comment, sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about audience quality or authenticity. The moderate fakeness score (25) reflects that the comment is more likely genuine than clearly fake, but could easily be generic/low-value. The overall suitability for advertising based on this comment alone is low (40) because it provides no evidence of engaged, relevant, or influential audience behavior. Recommendation: analyze a larger comment set and other signals before a purchasing decision — check comment diversity, depth (conversations, questions), ratio of meaningful comments to total engagement, likes-to-followers ratio, follower account quality, language audience alignment, and historical post performance." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 80, "overall_confidence": 75, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which eyeshadow palette was used; expresses interest in the product and possible purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a natural, specific question in German asking which eyeshadow palette was used. It references visual details (warm coral tones), uses polite language and an emoji, and requests actionable information — characteristics typical of a real follower rather than a bot or paid promotional comment. There are no signs of spam, generic compliments, or promotional links. Based on this comment alone, engagement quality appears high and indicates product interest, which is positive for advertising feasibility. Caveats: this assessment is based on one comment; a reliable decision should use a larger sample of comments, follower authenticity checks, and interaction patterns (like response rate, timing, and variety of commenters)." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Negative / critical", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express dissatisfaction or critique of the post's presentation/tone (saying the post is not subtle). Likely an authentic user reaction rather than promotional engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Dezent ist anders' (German: 'This is not subtle') is a brief negative/critical remark. Its language and brevity are typical of genuine user criticism rather than bot/spam or promotional comments. Because there is only one comment provided, this sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about overall audience quality or engagement authenticity. The low fakeness score reflects that the comment does not show typical fake-comment markers (repetition, generic praise, emoji spam, or solicitations). For ad-purchase decisions: this single negative comment is not a showstopper but indicates possible tone mismatch with some followers. I recommend a broader audit (comment volume and diversity, like-to-comment ratio, follower authenticity, account age and activity patterns) before making a buy decision." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "genuine interest from a follower seeking product information (possible purchase intent)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du?\") is a straightforward product inquiry and reads as genuine user engagement rather than automated or spammy content. It shows interest and potential purchase intent, which is positive for advertising. However, because this analysis is based on one comment only, conclusions about the overall authenticity of the account's engagement are limited. Recommendation: verify the commenter's profile (age, follower/following ratio, activity), check comment patterns across multiple posts (diversity, timing, language, emoji use), and compute standard metrics (engagement rate, like/comment ratios, follower growth) before making an advertising purchase decision. Current assessment: low likelihood of fake comment but insufficient sample size to strongly endorse ad spend without further audit." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "negative/critical", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express dissatisfaction or critique about the subject's appearance (eyebrows too high) — feedback/negative sentiment." }, { "type": "positive/praise", "count": 0, "purpose": "Compliments or supportive praise (none present in the sample)." }, { "type": "spam/self-promo", "count": 0, "purpose": "Promotional or irrelevant comments (none present in the sample)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment provided is a direct, succinct critique about the influencer's appearance ('Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....'). This reads as spontaneous, personal feedback and is unlikely to be fabricated or bot-generated (hence low fakeness score). With only one comment, the sample is too small to draw robust conclusions about overall audience sentiment, engagement quality, or authenticity of the broader comment set. For advertising feasibility: a lone critical comment does not disqualify the influencer, but it signals that some followers will voice candid negative opinions. Recommend reviewing a larger, representative set of comments (volume, sentiment distribution), commenter profiles (real accounts vs. throwaway usernames), engagement rates (likes per post, comments per follower), and how the influencer responds to criticism before making an ad buy decision." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product question / informational", "count": 1, "purpose": "Seeks factual information about product performance (coverage of pores); indicates genuine user interest and product-related skepticism/clarification." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?') is a direct, specific question about how the product addresses pore coverage. It reads like a genuine user inquiry rather than a generic compliment or a bot-style message (no emojis, no repeated marketing phrasing). This suggests at least some authentic engagement and interest in product details — a favorable sign for advertisers who want an audience that cares about efficacy. However, the sample is extremely limited (only one comment) so conclusions are weak: you cannot assess overall comment authenticity patterns, engagement rate, or detect bot behavior from a single data point. For advertising feasibility, this comment is a positive indicator but insufficient alone; recommend analyzing a larger set of comments (volume, repetition, timing), commenter account characteristics (age, follower counts, post history), and like-to-comment ratios before making a buy decision." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Information-seeking from the poster; expresses genuine curiosity about the product shown and invites a reply or clarification." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is provided: a German-language, plain-text question 'Was sind das für Produkte ?' (What kind of products are these?). This is a low-effort, content-specific query that is consistent with genuine audience interest rather than typical spam/bot patterns (no stock praise phrases, no links, no excessive emojis). Given the single example, there is low evidence of coordinated fake engagement; however, a single comment is insufficient to judge overall authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising decisions, this comment signals at best neutral-to-slightly-positive organic interest but does not demonstrate broad, high-quality engagement (no conversation thread, no likes on the comment shown, no multiple distinct commenters). Recommended next steps before ad spend: review a larger sample of recent comments for diversity of commenters, timing patterns, repetition of phrasing, commenter profile completeness (real photos, activity), comment like counts, and the influencer's reply rate. If you see many short generic comments (e.g., 'Nice!', single emojis, repeated questions) from low-follower accounts, raise the fakeness score and reduce suitability for advertising." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only positive engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expressing approval/affection or lightweight support; increases visible engagement without substantive feedback." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment consisting of three heart emojis is present. Emoji-only comments are common from genuine followers but are also frequently used by bots or low-effort engagement accounts; by themselves they carry low informational value about audience quality or intent to purchase. Given the limited sample (one short emoji comment), there is moderate suspicion of low-effort or automated engagement (fakeness leaning higher than genuine) but confidence is limited. For an advertising decision this single comment is insufficient evidence of an engaged, conversion-ready audience. Recommended next steps: audit a larger sample of recent comments for diversity and specificity, check commenter profiles for real accounts (photos, posting history, followers), compare like-to-comment ratios across multiple posts, and request audience demographics/insights from the influencer before committing to a purchase." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive compliment / generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation of the post's appearance (short positive social feedback); lightweight social proof and engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment provided: the German short compliment \"Richtig schön\" (\"Really beautiful\"). This is a generic, positive reaction that likely comes from an individual viewer and provides minimal signal about audience quality. It is short, non-specific and common in organic engagement; such comments can be genuine but are also easy to replicate by bots or paid commenters. Given the single data point, there is low confidence in detecting coordinated or fake behavior. For an advertising decision this comment alone is insufficient — you should request broader data: number of comments, likes, commenter account profiles (age, follower counts, activity), repeated comment wording, timing patterns, and comment-to-like ratio. Until you have that, treat engagement as low-information; do additional authenticity checks before purchase." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (🔥🔥🔥)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Generic positive reaction / expression of enthusiasm or approval; minimal-effort engagement that increases visible interaction but provides no substantive feedback." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: three 'fire' emojis. Emoji-only comments are common and can come from genuine followers, casual viewers, or automated/bot accounts and engagement pods. Because this comment contains no text, hashtag, mention, call-to-action, or link, it is low-information: it signals positive sentiment at surface level but gives no meaningful endorsement or intent to purchase. The moderate fakeness score reflects that emoji-only comments are relatively easy to fabricate or farm via engagement services, but are also frequently left by real users — so authenticity cannot be determined from this alone. For advertising-feasibility decisions this is weak evidence of high-quality organic engagement. I recommend collecting more comments across multiple posts, examining commenter profiles (age, follower counts, posting history), checking patterns of repeated generic comments across the influencer's posts, evaluating overall engagement rate (likes/comments relative to follower count), and looking at comment timestamps to detect bursts consistent with inorganic boosting. With only this single emoji comment available, proceed cautiously; do not rely on it as a sign of strong authentic audience engagement." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "defensive/supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defend the creator against perceived criticism and refocus the discussion on the content topic (makeup technique)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is brief, context-specific and reactive (mentions 'botox' then redirects to 'makeup technique'), which suggests a real human reply rather than generic bot content. Tone is defensive/protective of the creator and focuses engagement on the video/topic — a positive sign for audience interest in the subject matter. However, this analysis is based on one comment only: there is no evidence of broader engagement volume, diversity, or recurring patterns (no promotional spam, no questions, no emojis-only praise). For advertising-feasibility decisions this single comment is mildly encouraging (shows topical, engaged viewers) but far from sufficient to conclude strong, authentic community engagement. Recommended next steps: gather a larger sample of comments, comment timestamps, like counts, follower quality, and sentiment distribution before making a buy decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Transformation praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement and social proof — highlights a visible transformation and praises appearance, which supports influencer credibility for beauty/lifestyle content." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a specific, affirmative reaction: it praises a transformation, acknowledges contributing factors (hair and clothing), and finishes with a concrete positive assessment (looks more awake, fresh, youthful). Its relative specificity (mentioning hairstyle and clothing) and natural phrasing reduce the likelihood of a generic bot or spam comment. However, one comment is insufficient to judge overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising decisions you should request more data: number of comments, variety of commenters, timing distribution, likes per comment, follower quality, and any repetitive/generic comments. Based on this lone comment: low likelihood of being fake (fakeness_score 15), limited evidence for strong ad-readiness — supportive but not enough to conclude high ROI without broader engagement analysis." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short generic compliment (text + emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "praise / low-effort engagement / social proof" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" is a brief, positive, emoji-enhanced compliment. This type of comment is common and can be genuine, but it is also easy to generate by bots or paid commenters, so its authenticity is uncertain. Because there is only one comment to analyze, the sample size is too small to draw strong conclusions about the audience quality or engagement. For advertising feasibility this single positive comment provides weak evidence of an engaged, real community. Recommended next steps: request larger comment samples across multiple recent posts, engagement rate (likes/comments relative to follower count), follower quality checks (growth spikes, follower:following ratios), audience demographics, and timestamps/patterns of commenting to better assess authenticity and ad value." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short positive/emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration or positive sentiment; minimal informational value, likely intended to boost visible engagement (likes/comments) rather than start conversation." } ], "interpretation": "The sample consists of a single comment: \"Wow 😍\". This is a generic, positive emoji reaction that is common both among genuine followers and low-effort bot/spam accounts. With only one comment there is very low signal for authenticity: no specific praise, questions, or user detail to indicate a real engaged follower. The short, non-specific nature increases the chance the comment is low-effort or inorganic, though it could equally be a real fan. For advertising-purchase decisions this is weak evidence of meaningful audience engagement. I recommend analyzing more data before deciding: look at comment diversity and depth across multiple posts, like-to-comment ratios, audience demographics, timestamps (many similar comments posted quickly can indicate automation), repeat phrases across posts, follower quality (profiles, activity), and view-to-like ratios. Based on this single comment, I would not rely on the comments as proof of a highly engaged or authentic audience — proceed with caution or request deeper metrics/reporting from the influencer." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "user_mention / tag-only comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Notify/tag another account (could be a genuine friend-tag, simple engagement, or low-effort spam/promotional tag—often seen in comment pods or automated engagement)" } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available and it is a bare username mention (@rukiyevizercimen). Tag-only comments are low-information: they often serve to draw another user to the post (organic friend tag) but are also commonly produced by low-quality engagement behaviors (comment pods, promotional tagging, or bots). Given the single example, I assign a moderate fakeness score because tag-only comments are a known sign of low-quality or inorganic interaction, but the confidence is limited because a single comment could equally be a genuine friend notification. For advertising feasibility this sample is weak — a tag-only comment does not indicate genuine interest in content or product and suggests low comment quality. Recommendation: inspect more comments on this post and other recent posts, check commenter profiles (age, follower count, activity), look for repeated identical tags across posts, timing patterns, and compare comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios before making an ad buy decision." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/thankful (emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express gratitude/appreciation; simple engagement to increase visible interaction (likes/comments); signals follower support or polite acknowledgment." } ], "interpretation": "There is a single short comment: \"❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍\" (German: 'mega thanks' with emojis). It reads as a positive, appreciative reaction. Strengths: natural phrasing in German and use of multiple emojis point toward a human, engaged follower rather than a templated spammy phrase. Weaknesses: it is minimal and generic — the kind of short praise that can also be produced by low-effort bots or by followers incentivized to comment. With only one comment available, the sample is far too small to draw firm conclusions about overall audience authenticity or the account's value for advertising. Recommendation: treat this single comment as mildly positive but inconclusive. For an advertising decision, gather more data — number and variety of comments across multiple recent posts, commenter account quality (profile completeness, follower counts, posting history), like-to-comment ratios, timing of comments, and any patterns of repeated short praise across posts. If many comments look similar or come from low-quality accounts, raise the fakeness concern; if comments are diverse and from obviously real accounts, the influencer becomes more attractive. Based on this lone comment, the post shows genuine-seeming positive engagement but not enough evidence to confidently endorse ad spend." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "supportive/agreement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement with the post's message (endorsement/opinion), add genuine engagement" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr' — German for 'Right ... and less is often more') appears to be a brief, topical, human-style reaction expressing agreement with the post. It contains no promotional language, tags, links, repeated emojis, or generic one-word praise often seen in bot/spam comments. Based on phrasing and lack of clear bot indicators, the comment likely is genuine (low fakeness). However, this is a single data point: the sample is too small to draw reliable conclusions about the overall authenticity of the influencer's audience or the viability for advertising. Additional analysis is needed (more comments across multiple posts, timing patterns, follower quality, engagement rate, repetition of similar comments, account growth anomalies) before making a confident ad-purchase decision." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "low-effort emoji praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/admiration and provide quick social proof; increases visible engagement without adding substantive feedback." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: four applause emojis (\"👏👏👏👏\"). This is a low-information, positive reaction that functions as social proof but gives no qualitative feedback about the post or product. Such emoji-only comments are common from genuine followers (quick positive reaction) but are also commonly produced by automated/bot accounts or engagement farms because they are easy to generate and look human-like. With a single, generic emoji comment there is insufficient evidence to confidently judge authenticity or audience quality. Recommendation: do not make an advertising buy decision based on this comment sample alone. Perform further checks — examine commenter account profiles (age, activity, follower/following ratios), comment diversity across multiple posts, meaningful conversation, timing patterns, and the account's overall engagement rate relative to follower count. If many comments across posts are similarly generic and come from accounts with weak profiles, treat engagement as likely inauthentic and lower the influencer suitability score; if other comments are varied and commenters appear real, this emoji can be treated as genuine low-effort engagement." }

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": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "personal testimonial / product endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses personal experience with a product (Emulsion by @ohganicals), provides social proof and a brand mention/tag; also contains conversational engagement (emotive remark about approaching people who wear kajal)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads like an authentic user reaction: informal phrasing, an emoji, hesitation language ('Ich Trau mich nicht') and a first‑person product endorsement ('Ich schwöre fürs Abschminken auf die Emulsion... besser als alles, was ich davor hatte'). That combination suggests genuine organic engagement and useful social proof for the featured product/brand. However, the presence of a direct brand handle and the strongly positive endorsement leave a small possibility it is planted (affiliate/promo or paid comment). Confidence is limited because this analysis is based on one comment only — to increase reliability check commenter profile (age, follower count, posting history), repetition of the same endorsement across multiple posts, timestamps, and the distribution of comment types and likes. For advertising purchase feasibility: this comment is a positive signal (real-looking endorsement) and supports the influencer's credibility, but the sample is too small to rely on alone. Recommend requesting broader comment sample, engagement metrics (comment/like ratios), and audience authenticity checks before buying advertising." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Praise/compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive endorsement of the creator's appearance/makeup; expresses approval and emotional support (uses emojis to amplify sentiment)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏') reads as a short, topical compliment consistent with a follower responding positively to makeup content. There are no obvious spam or promotional signals (no links, unnatural phrasing, or repeated templates), so likelihood of this particular comment being fake is low. However, one comment is an extremely small sample size and cannot reliably indicate overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising-feasibility decisions, this isolated positive comment is mildly encouraging for makeup-related promotions but insufficient as evidence. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of recent comments for repetition patterns, timing (bursty/instant), commenter account quality (age, follower counts, activity), like-to-comment ratios, and language consistency across comments to better assess fake/comment-farm activity and true audience interest." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short praise/approval — minimal-effort engagement that signals positive sentiment and can boost visible engagement metrics. May be genuine fan reaction or a low-effort/batch comment used by bots or paid engagement services." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"Супер 👍\". This is a very short, generic positive comment. Such comments are ambiguous: they commonly come from real followers expressing quick approval, but they are also typical of automated or paid-comment farms because of their brevity and lack of post-specific content. Given the extremely small sample (n=1) there is very limited evidence to judge authenticity or the influencer's true audience quality. The fakeness score is tilted toward 'possibly fake' because of the generic wording, but confidence is low due to lack of contextual data (commenter profile, timing, comment frequency, like counts, other comments, follower count, engagement rate, language patterns). Overall suitability for advertising is scored low–moderate: one generic positive comment does not demonstrate an engaged, authentic community. Recommendation: to make a reliable advertising decision, request a larger sample of comments, commenter account metadata (age, follower/following ratios, posting history), overall engagement metrics (likes/comments per post, reach, saves), and look for varied, specific, conversational comments and commenter diversity. Also check for repeated phrases across posts and timing clusters that indicate inorganic activity." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / low-effort praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive sentiment and social approval (personal praise using the creator's name + emojis to signal support)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is: \"Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏\" — a short, affectionate compliment addressing the creator by a diminutive of their name and using multiple emojis. This is a low-effort, positive-engagement comment that provides social validation but no substantive information about audience interest in products or services.\n\nFakeness rationale: addressing the creator by name slightly lowers the probability of it being an automated bot, but the comment's generic structure and emoji-only emotional signalling are also typical of engagement pods or purchased comments. With only one example, the assessment is highly uncertain. Hence a moderate-low fakeness score (30) with limited confidence (40).\n\nAdvertising-feasibility rationale (overall score 50, confidence 35): one brief complimentary comment does not demonstrate meaningful, purchase-intent engagement or niche relevance. It indicates some positive sentiment among commenters but not depth (no questions, no product mentions, no user stories). Before recommending an ad buy, request more data: full recent comment sample (100–300 comments), overall engagement rate (likes/comments/impressions), follower audit (growth spikes, follower quality), audience demographics, and past campaign performance or conversions. If most comments mirror this low-effort praise and followers are real and relevant, the creator may still be usable for brand awareness but less persuasive for direct-response campaigns." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji reaction (clapping hands)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/encouragement; provide lightweight engagement/social proof with no informational content. Often used as a generic positive reaction and can be produced by both real users and low-effort/bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "The available sample is a single short emoji comment (two clapping hands). This delivers a very weak signal about audience quality or post authenticity. Short emoji-only comments are common from genuine followers as quick praise, but they are also a typical pattern for inorganic engagement (engagement pods or bot farms) because they are low-effort and reusable across many posts. With only one comment it is not possible to reliably discriminate. Therefore fakeness is moderately suspected but confidence is low. For advertising feasibility this comment set is insufficient: there is no substantive feedback, no conversation, no audience insight, and minimal evidence of engaged, invested followers. Before making an ad buy, inspect: (1) volume and diversity of comments across several recent posts, (2) commenter profiles (age, activity, follower counts, bios) to spot clusters of low-quality accounts, (3) like-to-comment ratios and time patterns (sudden bursts), and (4) other metrics such as story views, saves, reach, and audience demographics. Only with broader comment samples and account-level metrics can a reliable ad-purchase decision be made." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 8, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / information-seeking", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks whether the event is today and how to get there — signals genuine interest/intent and seeks logistical details." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Ist es nicht heute? wenn ja, wie komm ich dahin?') is a straightforward, organic-seeming question about timing and directions. It reads as a real user expressing intent to attend or engage, which is a positive authenticity signal and indicates actionable interest from at least one follower. Fakeness is low (score 8) because the language, phrasing and content are typical of real attendees asking logistical questions; there are no hallmarks of bot-like or copy-paste promotional comments.\n\nHowever, this assessment is based on one comment only. A single genuine comment is a weak sample for judging overall audience quality or engagement rate. For advertising-purchase feasibility, this isolated signal is encouraging but insufficient: you need volume (number of comments), variety (other comment types), commenter account quality (real profiles, follower counts, activity), and engagement metrics (likes, timing, reply threads). \n\nRecommendation: collect and analyze a larger sample of comments (50–200), inspect commenter profiles for authenticity, check engagement rates relative to follower count, and look for patterns (repeated generic praise, spam, or irrelevant links). If many comments similarly show specific, local, or logistical questions, that strengthens confidence in a real, engaged audience. Based on the single comment, give a cautious mid-level suitability rating (overall_score 45) with moderate uncertainty (overall_confidence 50)." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 25, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Non-specific positive engagement (expresses approval/enthusiasm). Often used to boost visible engagement without providing substantive feedback or purchase intent; can come from genuine followers, casual viewers, engagement pods, or automated/bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (three fire emojis) is a generic positive engagement signal: it increases visible activity but provides no actionable insight into audience quality or conversion likelihood. Emoji-only comments are common and can be genuine casual reactions, but they are also frequently produced by low-effort accounts, engagement pods, or bots — hence a moderate fakeness risk. Given only one comment, confidence in any assessment is low. For advertising decisions, this comment alone is an insufficient signal. Recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments and commenter profiles (look for substantive comments, repeated patterns, account age/follower ratios, timing of comments, and whether commenters are genuine users) plus like-to-comment ratios and audience demographics before purchasing ad space or collaborations." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Positive generic praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/approval and provide visible engagement (short positive reaction)." } ], "interpretation": "The sole comment is a brief, positive reaction in German ('Unglaublich' = 'Incredible') with clapping emojis. This pattern is common for genuine supporters but also matches low-effort bot or paid-comment templates, so authenticity is uncertain. With only one short, non-specific comment there is insufficient evidence to judge audience quality, engagement depth, or organic reach. For advertising feasibility, this single comment is weak signal: it shows at least one positive reaction but does not demonstrate meaningful conversation, diverse language/community engagement, or endorsement specificity. I recommend reviewing a larger sample of recent comments, commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, posting behavior), overall like-to-comment ratios, and follower demographics before making ad-buy decisions." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 45, "fakeness_confidence": 30, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express enthusiasm/approval; short, low-effort engagement intended to show support and increase visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). This is a positive, but very low-information signal — common among genuine followers as a quick sign of approval and also frequently used by engagement pods or bot accounts. With a single short emoji it's impossible to reliably distinguish authentic fans from inorganic activity. The moderate fakeness score reflects that emoji-only comments have a nontrivial chance of being low-effort or automated, but could equally be legitimate. For advertising feasibility, this single data point is inconclusive (hence the mid overall score). Recommended next steps: inspect the commenter account(s) for follower count, posting history, follower/following ratio, and whether the same emoji appears repeatedly across posts; analyze a larger sample of recent comments, comment timing patterns, and overall engagement rate on multiple posts before making a buy decision." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Acknowledgement / Confirmation", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short one-word reply ('Erledigt' = 'Done') that signals completion of a task or confirmation of an action. Likely administrative (collaborator, team member) or a low-effort follower response to a call-to-action. Low marketing value for gauging authentic audience interest." } ], "interpretation": "There is only a single terse comment ('Erledigt'), which provides very little signal about audience sentiment or authenticity. This kind of comment commonly appears when someone acknowledges a task (internal coordination, delivery confirmation, or a follower marking a requested action as completed) and is low-value for advertising assessment. The short, context-free nature makes it ambiguous — it could be genuine (a real person confirming something) or part of low-effort/bot activity; therefore fakeness suspicion is moderate but uncertain. Overall, based on this lone comment the post shows weak meaningful engagement; I would not rely on this sample alone to judge influencer suitability for advertising. Recommendation: obtain the full comment set, commenter profiles, timing/patterns of comments, like-to-follower ratio, and prevalence of similar one-word replies before making an advertising 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: +

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: War ein sehr schöner Abend ❤️

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

Text: +

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": 75, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / Compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine information-seeking and expression of interest (asks where to buy; indicates purchase intent)" } ], "interpretation": "Single comment reads as a natural German-language compliment plus direct product inquiry: \"What a beautiful color is that? Where can I get it?\" This signals genuine interest and potential purchase intent rather than typical bot/spam phrasing. Fakeness is assessed low (10) but confidence is moderate-high only because it's a single data point. For advertising feasibility this is a positive signal — the audience shows product-relevant engagement — but sample size is too small to make a strong decision. Recommended next steps: examine additional comments, commenter profile(s) (age, activity, follower count), ratio of similar inquiries, timing patterns, and overall engagement rate. Consider a small test campaign or request more comment batches from the influencer before a larger ad buy." }

Text: Wie zauberhaft du das erklärst ♥️✨

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 12, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Praise / Compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement and social proof — expresses appreciation for the creator's explanation and encourages the creator/audience." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads in German: \"Wie zauberhaft du das erklärst ♥️✨\" (\"How magically you explain that\"). Tone and wording are natural, specific to the content (praising the explanation) and include supportive emojis, which together suggest a genuine follower reaction rather than a generic spam comment. Because the sample is only one comment, this is a limited data point: a low fakeness score is appropriate but should be treated cautiously. For influencer-advertising decisions this isolated positive comment is a small signal of engaged audience sentiment but not sufficient to judge overall engagement authenticity or reach. Recommended next steps: review a larger set of recent comments for repetition/generic phrasing, inspect commenter profiles for follower counts/activity, compare comments-to-likes ratio across posts, and check for repeated identical comments across multiple posts to detect coordinated or fake engagement." }

Text: Welche Produkte benutzt du?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / genuine engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking which products the influencer uses — indicates interest in the influencer's routine and potential purchase intent; useful for brand conversion and partnership value." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, \"Welche Produkte benutzt du?\" (\"Which products do you use?\"), is a straightforward product inquiry and reads as authentic follower engagement rather than obvious bot or spam. This type of question signals purchase intent or at least curiosity, which is positive for advertiser interest. However, assessment is highly limited by sample size (one comment) and lack of contextual metadata (posting frequency, other comments, likes, commenter profile age/credibility, timing). There is a small possibility it's a generic automated comment or a competitor probing, but linguistic specificity and natural phrasing reduce that likelihood. Overall, the comments show genuine interest but extremely low volume — useful signal but insufficient alone to judge audience quality or ad feasibility. Recommend reviewing more comments, commenter profiles, engagement rate, and comment diversity before making an advertising decision." }

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": 85, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 65, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / request", "count": 1, "purpose": "An authentic-seeming follower asking for makeup/foundation recommendations for skin over 50 that does not settle into wrinkles (seeking actionable advice/product suggestions)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a natural, specific request in German for makeup/foundation advice for skin 50+, which reads as genuine engagement rather than a generic or promotional reply. This indicates at least some audience interest in age-targeted cosmetic content and suggests relevance for beauty/anti‑aging advertisers. Limitations: analysis is based on one comment only — there is no volume, timing, like/reply context, or commenter profile data to confirm audience size or account authenticity. Recommended next steps before purchasing ads: review a larger sample of comments for similar intent, check commenter profiles for real followers, measure overall engagement rate, and verify follower demographics to confirm a substantial mature-skin audience." }

Text: Sehr informativ

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short positive / generic comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive feedback / social proof / low-effort engagement; signals approval but provides no substantive discussion or personal connection." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment ('Sehr informativ' — 'Very informative') was available. Its brevity and generic wording are consistent with low-effort positive engagement: this can be genuine (a quick appreciative reply) or a typical bot/generic commenter phrase used to boost perceived engagement. The language matches a German-speaking audience, which slightly lowers suspicion if the influencer's content/audience is German. However, with a sample size of one there is high uncertainty. For advertising feasibility this single comment provides weak evidence of a genuinely engaged, conversational audience. Recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments, commenter profiles (real names, avatars, follower counts, comment histories), comment timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and presence of back-and-forth replies to better judge authenticity and ad suitability." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Simple positive reaction (heart). Indicates approval/affection but carries very low informational value; can be genuine quick-engagement from a real follower or produced by low-effort/bot accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment (a heart emoji) is provided. This is a low-signal data point: short emoji reactions are extremely common and ambiguous — they occur both from real followers and from inorganic/low-effort accounts. Given only this comment, I cannot confidently assess authenticity or audience quality. Fakeness risk is moderate (scored 60) because emoji-only comments are a common pattern in inauthentic engagement, but confidence is limited due to lack of context and sample size. For advertising feasibility, the evidence is weak and leans toward 'do not rely on this post alone' (overall score 30). Recommended next steps before purchase: obtain the full comments list and likes for multiple recent posts, sample commenter profiles (activity, follower counts, follower/following ratios), engagement rates over time, and look for repetition (same short emojis/comments across many posts). If many comments are similarly minimal or from suspicious accounts, treat the audience as likely low-quality and either decline or run a very small test campaign. If additional, varied, and substantive comments and authentic commenter profiles are supplied, reassess." }

Text: Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 20, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic praise/compliment with emojis", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement / social proof — expresses appreciation for the creator's tips in a short, enthusiastic way to signal approval and encourage the creator." } ], "interpretation": "Comment analyzed (original: \"Ich liebe deine Tipps😍😍😍\" — translation: \"I love your tips😍😍😍\"). This is a short, positive, emoji-heavy compliment. Such comments serve as social proof and can help perceived engagement, but they are low-information: they do not reference specific content, include no questions or conversation, and are single-line praise — characteristics common to both genuine quick-reacting followers and automated/generic engagement. I rated the fakeness at 30/100 (moderate-to-low probability of being fake) because the language is plausible for a real follower yet generic enough to be used by bots or comment farms; the confidence is limited (45/100) due to having only one comment to evaluate and no metadata (account age, username pattern, posting time, or other comments). The overall suitability score for advertising based solely on this comment is neutral (50/100) with low confidence (20/100) — a single positive but generic comment is insufficient evidence of an engaged, authentic audience. Recommendation: do not make ad buying decisions from this single comment. Collect more data points — number and variety of comments, commenter profiles and follower counts, like-to-comment ratio, temporal patterns, recurring commenter behavior, and audience demographics. Run automated checks for bot-like usernames and repeated phrasing, and, if possible, request influencer audience insights or use third-party influencer-audit tools to measure engagement authenticity before committing to advertising." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "product inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which product (which lipstick) is used — indicates genuine interest and possible purchase intent." }, { "type": "compliment / praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive sentiment about the lipstick color — supports influencer appeal and favorable perception." }, { "type": "engagement / conversational", "count": 1, "purpose": "Invites a reply from the influencer (thanks in advance) — increases meaningful engagement potential." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads like an authentic user: it asks a specific product question, includes a compliment, and requests a reply. The grammar is slightly off but natural for a non-native speaker, which reduces the likelihood of it being bot-generated or a stock fake comment. Fakeness is low (10/100) but confidence is moderate because assessment is based on one comment only. For advertising feasibility: the comment is a positive signal (product interest and engagement) but insufficient on its own to conclude the audience quality. Recommended additional checks before purchase: sample more comments for diversity (are many similar/generic comments present?), inspect commenter profiles for real follower counts and activity, compute engagement rate vs follower count, check timing patterns (bursts of comments), and review conversion metrics from prior sponsored posts. Based on this single comment, the post shows some genuine product interest, so it contributes positively to ad feasibility, but you should base decisions on a larger sample of comments and profile-level metrics." }

Text: Schöne Farbe 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic positive compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express appreciation/positive reaction to visual content (short praise + emoji). Often used to signal engagement or approval without substantive interaction." } ], "interpretation": "There is a single short, positive comment: \"Schöne Farbe 😍\" (\"Nice color\"). This is a generic compliment that could come from a genuine follower, a casual viewer, or an automated/bought account — the message alone lacks distinctive personal detail, question, or account-specific reference that would indicate genuine interest. Given only this one data point, fakeness is moderately likely (many bots and engagement farms post brief praise with emojis), but confidence is limited because we lack contextual signals (commenter profile, account age, comment timing, volume and variety of other comments, likes on the comment, and repetition patterns).\n\nFor advertising feasibility: this single comment does not provide strong evidence either for or against authentic audience engagement. Recommend broader checks before ad purchase: inspect a larger sample of recent comments for repetition or copy-paste patterns, analyze commenter profiles (follower counts, activity, profile photos), check engagement rate (likes vs followers), look for substantive comments or conversations, and review posting frequency and audience demographics. Based on the one comment alone I give a cautious, near-neutral suitability score; do deeper due diligence before committing budget." }

Text: Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/thankful", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses gratitude and compliments the creator's tips; signals genuine engagement and social approval (social proof)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Inna vielen Dank für deine tolle Tips ❤️') reads as a direct, positive thank-you to the influencer (uses the influencer's name, a heart emoji, and references 'tips'). Language contains a minor grammatical inconsistency but that is common in real user comments and does not indicate automation. There are no hallmarks of bot or promotional comments (no generic superlatives, no tags, no links, no short one-word spam). Given this one example, the likelihood the comment is genuine is high (fakeness score low), but confidence is limited by sample size. For advertising feasibility: this comment is a small positive signal (shows audience engagement and appreciation for actionable content), but a single comment is insufficient to judge audience quality or overall engagement patterns; recommend reviewing a larger sample of comments, like-to-follower ratio, comment depth across multiple posts, timing patterns, and follower authenticity checks before purchase decisions." }

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": 65, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment + Content Request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise the influencer's manicure/appearance and request information about hand care; shows interest and prompts further content engagement (likely genuine follower engagement from a beauty-interested user)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a personalized compliment mentioning the manicure and hands, plus a direct request for hand-care information. Language is specific and uses polite phrasing ('Erzähl uns mal bitte'), which reduces likelihood of being an automated generic bot comment. There are no obvious spam markers (repeated emojis, links, or generic one-word phrases). Based on this sample, the comments signal authentic audience interest in beauty/hand-care topics — a positive indicator for advertisers in nail, manicure, or hand-care categories. However, this assessment is based on a single comment: conclusions are preliminary. To increase confidence, analyze a larger comment sample and reviewer metadata (commenter profile age/follower count, comment timing patterns, repetition across posts, like counts on comments). Recommendation: proceed cautiously — influencer appears relevant for handcare/nail advertisers, but verify overall comment diversity, engagement rates, and commenter authenticity before purchase." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 65, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry + compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Ask which eyeshadow/product is used and express positive sentiment (emoji). Indicates genuine interest in product and potential purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Was für einen Lidschatten nimmst du? Tolle Farbe😍') reads as organic: it's in natural German, uses direct address ('du'), asks a specific product question and includes a positive emoji. These features are typical of real followers seeking product details rather than generic bot/spam comments. Based on this one sample the probability of it being fake is low. However, one comment is an extremely small sample for judging overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility this is a mildly positive signal (shows product interest), but you should not base a buy decision on this alone. Recommended next steps: examine a larger set of recent comments for repetition/generic phrasing, check commenter profiles (activity, follower counts), like-to-comment ratio, timing patterns, and conversion metrics (click-throughs, tracked affiliate sales) to form a reliable assessment." }

Text: Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Critical / personal question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Direct engagement asking about the influencer's appearance (clarification/critique). Likely an individual follower giving feedback or asking a question." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is present: 'Sind dann hier deine Lippen übergeschminkt ?' (Are your lips overmade-up here?). The language and phrasing are natural, specific and not promotional, so the comment likely originates from a real person rather than a bot or paid engagement — hence the low fakeness score. However, the sample size is extremely small, so overall engagement volume is low and provides limited evidence of an active, engaged audience. The comment's tone is mildly critical/questioning, which can indicate authentic follower interaction (people are comfortable offering candid feedback). For advertising decisions, this single-comment snapshot is insufficient: assess comment volume relative to follower count, comment diversity, repeat phrasing across posts, timing patterns, like-to-comment ratios, and account follower authenticity before purchasing ads. Recommendation: collect a larger sample of comments across recent posts and run additional bot/novelty checks before finalizing ad spend." }

Text: ❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 50, "fakeness_confidence": 25, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 20, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Single-emoji positive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Simple positive reaction / approval. Low-effort engagement intended to express support or affection and to contribute to visible engagement metrics." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment was provided: a single heart emoji (\"❤️\"). This is a very low-information data point. Single-emoji comments are common both from genuine followers (quick, warm responses) and from low-effort bot/farm accounts used to inflate engagement. Given only this comment, there is moderate uncertainty about fakeness — hence a middle fakeness score with low confidence. For advertising decisions this comment gives almost no signal about audience quality, intent, purchase interest, or authenticity. Recommendation: do not rely on this single comment. Collect more data points (number and variety of comments across multiple posts, comment authors' profiles, timing patterns, repetition of identical comments, ratio of substantive comments to emoji/generic comments, follower growth patterns, and engagement rates relative to follower count) before deciding on ad spend. If additional comments show similar low-effort patterns at scale, treat engagement as potentially inflated and proceed cautiously; if you observe diverse, substantive comments from unique accounts, confidence in organic engagement and ad feasibility would be higher." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 65, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "compliment/praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration for the poster's appearance to provide positive social proof." }, { "type": "relatability/self-deprecating humor", "count": 1, "purpose": "Build rapport and show a personal connection by comparing the commenter to the influencer in a humorous way." }, { "type": "emoji expression", "count": 1, "purpose": "Convey tone/emotion (laughing + heart-eyes) to strengthen positive sentiment and friendliness." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment reads as spontaneous and authentic: informal phrasing, self-deprecating humor, and mixed emojis create a natural conversational tone that fits a real follower leaving a flattering remark. The purpose is primarily praise and engagement rather than promotion or soliciting action. Given only one comment, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions about the overall commentbase or audience quality. For advertising feasibility, this comment is a positive indicator of genuine engagement and social proof, but you should analyze a larger, representative set of comments (volume, diversity, timing, repeated phrases, follower profiles) before deciding. Current assessment: likely genuine (low fakeness) but limited-confidence overall due to minimal data." }

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": 65, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "constructive criticism / question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Nutzer sucht Hilfe oder Klarstellung und gibt gleichzeitig Feedback zur Darstellung; zeigt ehrliches Interesse und Engagement gegenüber dem Inhalt/Creator." } ], "interpretation": "Der einzelne Kommentar ist eine persönliche, konstruktive Rückmeldung in natürlicher Sprache (keine typischen Bot-/Spam‑Muster wie generische Lobsätze, Emojis ohne Text oder Copy‑Pastetexte). Er zielt darauf ab, Verständnis für eine Darstellung/Technik zu bekommen und weist auf ein mögliches Problem hin. Für die Werbeentscheidung ist das ein positives Signal in dem Sinne, dass echte, kritische Interaktion stattfindet — das spricht für Authentizität und Engagement. Allerdings ist dies nur ein Einzelbeispiel; zur belastbaren Einschätzung sollten Sie mehr Kommentare prüfen (Muster, Wiederholungen, Zeitstempel), das Like‑/Reply‑Verhältnis, Follower‑Qualität und Themen‑Sentiment. Wenn viele ähnliche kritisch‑fragende Kommentare vorhanden sind, kann das die Werbewirkung mindern. Aktuell: Kommentarbildung wirkt echt und liefert nützliche Insights, daher moderat geeignet für Werbung, aber weitere quantitative und qualitative Analyse empfohlen." }

Text: Volle Lippen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / appearance remark", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive praise highlighting a physical feature (\"Volle Lippen\" = \"full lips\"); likely intended as flattery or engagement rather than product interest or a call-to-action." } ], "interpretation": "Only one short comment was provided, so conclusions are very limited. The comment is a concise, positive remark about appearance (compliment). It contains no links, hashtags, emojis, or overt promotional language. This pattern is consistent with a genuine follower compliment but could also be a generic single-word comment produced by low-effort bot activity—short, non-unique phrases are used by both humans and automated accounts. Given the sparse sample, I assess a relatively low likelihood of overtly fake behavior (fakeness_score 25) but with low confidence (35) because one data point is not diagnostic. For advertising feasibility: this comment provides little evidence of product interest, intent to purchase, or meaningful audience engagement. Overall suitability for ad purchase based on the comments alone is low (overall_score 30) with low confidence (30). Recommendation: collect a larger set of comments and examine commenter profiles (account age, follower ratios, content consistency), comment timing/repetition patterns, like counts, and replies to better judge authenticity and audience quality before deciding on ad spend." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express praise and agreement with the influencer's advice; provides social proof and signals willingness to follow recommendations." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment content: \"Danke für den Tip. Niemals sind schmale Lippen schön . Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen.\" — A short, positive, generic endorsement in German. Strengths: gives explicit praise and commitment to follow the influencer's tips, which can act as social proof to other viewers. Weaknesses / signals of possible inauthenticity: phrasing is generic and formulaic (\"Werde deinen perfekten Tipps immer folgen\"), minor grammar/orthography issues (\"Tip\" vs \"Tipp\") which can appear in both genuine and bot-generated comments, absence of emojis or user-specific details, and only one comment provided (very small sample). Given just this single comment, assessment is necessarily tentative. Recommended verification steps before making advertising decisions: check the commenter account (age, follower count, posting history, avatar), look for multiple similar comments across posts (repeat phrasing), compare number of comments to likes and reach for suspicious ratios, review recent comment timestamps for bursts, and run a broader authenticity audit (audience demographics, follower growth, engagement rate, comment diversity). Conclusion: The comment provides mild positive social proof but is not strongly diagnostic; treat as weak evidence of engaged, authentic audience. For ad-buy decisions, request more comprehensive engagement data and manual checks; do not rely on this single comment as proof of a healthy, real audience." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Content request / Genuine interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "User requests a specific content/topic (business makeup for a photoshoot); expresses positive interest and potential intent to engage with that content." } ], "interpretation": "There is only one comment provided: 'Ein Business MakeUp für Fotoshooting würde mich interessieren. 😍' — a German-language, topic-specific request expressing interest. Characteristics point to a genuine user rather than a bot: specific phrasing (not generic praise), language coherence, an emoji that matches the sentiment, and a clear content request. Given that, the comment-level fakeness is low (score 10) with reasonably high confidence. However, a single comment is an extremely small sample and does not permit reliable conclusions about overall audience authenticity or engagement quality. For advertising feasibility this single positive, topic-relevant comment is a favorable signal (shows interest in makeup/photoshoot content) but is not sufficient evidence by itself to recommend purchase. I recommend: (1) analyze a larger sample of recent comments for repetition, timing patterns, language diversity and generic spam; (2) inspect commenter profiles (follower counts, avatars, activity) for bot signs; (3) check like-to-comment ratios, comment timestamps, and reply interaction from the influencer. With broader data, provide a more confident overall assessment for ad buying." }

Text: Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive_generic_compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express approval/admiration (engagement signal); could be genuine fan praise or generic/bot-like engagement because it's short, non-specific and uses emoji." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: \"Einfach nur WOW, sieht toll aus😍\". It is a short, generic positive compliment with an emoji. Such comments often indicate positive sentiment but provide no substantive engagement (no question, no detail, no personal reference). The fakeness score is moderate-low (35) because the comment is generic and could be produced by bots or by casual followers; however, with a single comment the evidence is weak (confidence 40). Overall assessment for advertising feasibility is low (30) because one generic comment indicates very limited comment-level engagement and provides little signal of an active, engaged audience. Confidence in the overall assessment is moderate (50) because the sample is extremely small. Recommended next steps before any ad purchase: obtain more comments and likes data across multiple recent posts, inspect commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, activity), check like-to-comment ratios and comment timestamps for bursts, and analyze follower authenticity (follower growth patterns, engagement rates)." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 75, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Purchase inquiry / product interest", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks where the products are available — indicates direct purchase intent and genuine interest." }, { "type": "Praise / engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Short positive reaction (\"Wow 🤩\") signalling approval and attention to the post." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment (German: \"Wow 🤩 wo sind die Produkte erhältlich? Bitte 🙏\") appears genuine and indicates real user interest: it combines praise with a clear purchase inquiry. Indicators of authenticity include natural phrasing in the local language, polite request, and emoji usage consistent with organic engagement. Fakeness risk is low but not zero (score 10) because assessment is based on one comment only. Limitations: sample size = 1, no information about the commenter account, timing, or patterns across other comments. For advertising decisions this is a positive signal (overall score 75) but insufficient alone — recommend analyzing a larger set of comments, follower quality (real vs. bot), overall engagement rate, comment diversity, responder behavior (does influencer reply/convert inquiries), and historical campaign performance before purchase." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Positive reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and social-proof (short affirmation of the post using emojis and a brief phrase)" } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('👏👏👏👏😍❤️ sehr schön') is a short, positive, emoji-rich compliment. This is a common, low-effort engagement style used by genuine followers as well as by bots or engagement pods. There are no obvious spam indicators (no links, no off-topic text, natural language), which lowers immediate suspicion, but the brevity and generic nature raise moderate possibility of automated or low-effort engagement. Because only one comment is available, the sample is too small to draw strong conclusions for advertising decisions. Recommended next checks: review more comments for repetition/patterns, inspect the commenter’s account (age, follower count, posts), check comment timestamps for bursts, and compare overall comment diversity and comment-to-like ratio to better estimate authenticity before purchasing ad space." }

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": 40, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / information request", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asks which eyeshadow palette was used — indicates specific product interest and potential purchase intent." }, { "type": "Compliment / positive feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praises the warm coral tones of the look, reinforcing positive sentiment and authentic engagement." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment is a natural, specific, and polite product inquiry in German (\"Which eyeshadow palette did you use? ... I would like to know the palette. 🙏🏻\"). It contains a compliment and a direct request for product information, which are typical of genuine follower engagement and indicate real interest in the creator's recommended product. The language, emoji usage, and specificity make it unlikely to be a bot or generic spam comment. However, this analysis is based on one comment only — that is an extremely small sample and cannot reliably represent the overall authenticity of the influencer's comment section or their audience. For advertising feasibility this single comment is a positive signal (shows product curiosity and potential conversion), but it is insufficient evidence on its own. Recommended next steps: obtain a larger sample of comments (50–200), check comment diversity and timing, inspect usernames for bot patterns, compare comment-to-follower and like-to-follower ratios, and look for repeated/generic phrases that indicate inorganic engagement. Based on the single comment, treat the channel as tentatively promising for product-related sponsorships but require deeper audit before committing to ad spend." }

Text: Dezent ist anders

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 80, "overall_score": 55, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative user comment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express a negative opinion about the post (short critique suggesting the post is not subtle). Likely intended to voice displeasure and possibly provoke or join a discussion." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment, \"Dezent ist anders\" (\"This is not subtle\"), is a short, context-specific critical remark that reads like authentic human feedback rather than a generic praise or spammy bot message. Fakeness is assessed low (10) because the phrasing is informal, opinionated, and tied to aesthetic judgment—characteristics bots rarely mimic precisely. Confidence in that judgment is relatively high (80) given the comment's linguistic specificity, but limited by the sample size (only one comment).\n\nOverall assessment for advertising purchase: neutral to mildly positive (score 55) with moderate-low confidence (45). One critical comment alone doesn't meaningfully harm ad feasibility, but it does indicate that at least some followers will openly criticize the content. To make a reliable advertising decision you need a larger sample: volume and variety of comments, like-to-comment ratio, commenter profiles (real followers vs. unknown accounts), sentiment distribution, and engagement trends over multiple posts. Based on this single data point: authenticity is likely, there's visible critical engagement which can be good for authenticity but may signal polarizing content. Recommended next steps: collect a representative set of recent comments (50–200), examine top commenters' profiles, and measure overall sentiment and engagement rates before finalizing ad spend." }

Text: Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / Question", "count": 1, "purpose": "Genuine engagement — asking which products the influencer uses, indicating interest and potential purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"Hallo. Welche Produkte verwendest Du.\" This is a straightforward product-related question in German. It appears natural language (no spammy links, emojis, repeated generic praise, or promotional language), so it likely originates from a real user showing interest. However, with only one comment there is very limited evidence to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. Risk factors: low sample size, no metadata on commenter account (age, follower count, history), no information about comment timing or other comments on the post. Recommendations: (1) inspect commenter profiles for real-photo accounts, follower/following ratios, and comment histories; (2) calculate overall engagement rate (likes, comments relative to follower count) and comment diversity; (3) look for patterns of repeated short generic comments that would suggest bot activity; (4) use a larger sample (multiple posts) before deciding on ad spend. Current assessment: the single comment is likely genuine (low fakeness), but the dataset is insufficient to confidently recommend advertising purchase — moderate overall score." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 85, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "critical/negative feedback", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses a direct aesthetic critique about the influencer's appearance (eyebrows). Serves as audience feedback and indicates genuine viewer reaction rather than promotion or spam." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Die Augenbrauen sind aber auch zu hoch gesetzt....') is a specific, contextual critique about the subject's eyebrows and reads as a genuine human response rather than generic praise or bot-like spam. Its specificity and language usage suggest low fakeness. However, this is only one comment — there is no information on volume, variety, timing, or commenter account profiles. As a result: (1) authenticity of engagement appears likely, (2) sentiment is negative/critical which may matter for beauty or appearance-focused advertising, and (3) the sample size is too small to judge overall audience quality or engagement rate. For ad-purchase decisions, gather more comments, like-to-follower ratio, commenter profiles, and recurrence of similar critiques. Given the single comment, I rate the post's immediate advertising suitability as cautious/neutral (score 40) with limited confidence." }

Text: Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product question / genuine user inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking for clarification about how the product covers pores — information-seeking and engagement from a potential customer." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment (German: \"Womit sind die Poren denn nun abgedeckt?\") is a direct, specific question about product performance (pore coverage). It reads like a genuine consumer inquiry rather than a promotional or bot-generated remark: it contains no generic praise, no emojis or hashtags, and asks for concrete information. Based on this one comment there are low signs of fakery, but the sample size is extremely small. For an advertising decision you should collect more data: volume and diversity of comments, repetition of similar questions, commenter profiles (real followers vs. likely bots), timing patterns, and overall engagement rate. With only this comment, the post shows some genuine interest but is insufficient alone to conclude high audience quality." }

Text: Was sind das für Produkte ?

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 70, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / Inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking what the products are — information-seeking, indicates curiosity or potential purchase interest; typical genuine follower engagement." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available: a simple, grammatically normal question in German (\"Was sind das für Produkte ?\"). This looks like authentic human engagement rather than a promotional or bot-like remark. With a single short inquiry we can infer some genuine interest but cannot judge overall audience quality or engagement patterns. The low fakeness score reflects that this comment is unlikely to be fake, while the modest overall score and low confidence reflect that the sample size is too small to make a reliable decision about advertising feasibility. Recommendation: review a larger set of recent comments, reply patterns, timing, diversity of commenters, like-to-comment ratio, and follower authenticity before purchasing advertising or collaborating." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Emoji-only (hearts)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Low-effort positive engagement: expresses affection/approval. Can be genuine follower engagement but is commonly used by bots or purchased comments because it requires no contextual relevance." } ], "interpretation": "Only one comment is available and it consists of three heart emojis. This is a minimal, generic positive signal that does not provide topic-specific feedback, intent to purchase, or meaningful conversation. Emoji-only comments are ambiguous: they may be authentic quick reactions from real followers, but are also frequently produced by automated accounts or bought-engagement services because they are easy to generate and inflate apparent positivity. Given the single data point, I assess a moderate likelihood of inauthenticity (fakeness_score 60) with only moderate confidence due to lack of surrounding context (posting time, comment velocity, commenter profile, other comments, overall engagement metrics). For advertising feasibility, this single generic comment provides weak evidence of an engaged, targeted audience — recommended overall score is low (30). I recommend collecting more data before deciding: analyze commenter account age/activity, distribution of comment types across other posts, like-to-comment ratios, follower growth patterns, and presence of meaningful, contextual comments from distinct accounts." }

Text: Richtig schön

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 30, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "generic positive praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Compliment / positive feedback — short, non-specific praise used to show appreciation and add social proof" } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: 'Richtig schön' (German for 'really/very beautiful'). This is a short, generic positive remark that commonly appears on influencer posts. Such comments can be organic (a genuine follower compliment) but are also easy to generate automatically or by low-effort engagement farms, so a moderate fakeness probability is assigned. The sample size is too small to draw robust conclusions: there is no information on commenter identity, posting time patterns, presence of similar repeated comments, like-to-comment ratio, or overall follower count. For advertising feasibility the available evidence is weak — low visible engagement and lack of varied, substantive comments reduce confidence that the audience is genuinely engaged or targeted. Recommendation: obtain the full comment list, commenter profiles, post likes, follower demographics, and engagement history to make a reliable buy/no-buy decision." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only (fire emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Low-information positive reaction — expresses enthusiasm/approval and contributes to visible engagement/social proof. Could be a genuine quick reaction, an engagement-pod reply, or a bot-generated like-comment." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: \"🔥🔥🔥\". Emoji-only comments carry very little semantic information; they mainly function to signal approval and inflate apparent engagement. Such comments are commonly produced by genuine followers casually reacting, by coordinated engagement pods, or by automated/bot accounts that post generic emojis. Given the lack of contextual signals (no username, account age, comment timing, reply patterns, comment diversity, or like counts), the assessment is tentative. I rate the comment set as moderately likely to be inauthentic (fakeness 65/100) because emoji-only comments are overrepresented in inauthentic engagement strategies, but this could easily be a real follower reacting (confidence 60). For advertising feasibility, the available evidence is insufficient; overall suitability is below average (45/100) with low confidence (40/100). Recommended next steps before any ad purchase: 1) Gather a larger sample of recent comments and likes (variety, timestamps, repeat commenters). 2) Inspect commenter profiles for real-person signals (profile photos, varied posting history, follower counts, bio). 3) Check engagement rate (likes/comments relative to follower count) and compare to benchmarks for the influencer's niche. 4) Look for signs of engagement pods/bot behavior (many short generic comments, same emojis repeated, many accounts created recently). Only after those checks can a reliable decision about ad spend be made." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 60, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "defensive/supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Defend the creator against personal criticism (mention of Botox) and redirect the conversation to the post's topic (makeup technique)." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment reads as a direct, topical defense of the creator: the commenter dismisses a personal-appearance accusation and refocuses on the content (makeup technique). Linguistically it appears natural and context-specific (uses a rhetorical question and colloquial tone), which reduces the likelihood it's a generic bot or paid promotional message. However, with only one comment it's impossible to judge the broader audience quality, engagement patterns, or prevalence of inauthentic comments. For advertising feasibility: this comment is a modest positive signal (shows at least some engaged, protective followers who care about content over gossip), but the sample is too small to rely on. Recommend collecting a larger sample of comments, likes, follower growth, and other engagement metrics before making a buy decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 70, "overall_confidence": 55, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive transformation / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Praise and endorsement of the influencer's appearance; expresses admiration and signals positive sentiment. Also contains a brief observational qualifier (mentions hair and clothing) making it appear more specific and personal." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment is a natural, specific compliment: enthusiastic language, an emoji, and the qualifier that hairstyle and clothing also contribute. These features point toward an authentic, engaged follower rather than a generic or bot comment (low fakeness). However, this is only one comment — sample size is too small to generalize about the whole audience. For advertising feasibility this comment is a positive signal (favorable sentiment, some nuance indicating a real viewer), but you should request a larger sample of comments, like/engagement ratios, and follower quality metrics before making a buy decision." }

Text: Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 45, "comment_types": [ { "type": "positive/compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration/approval and provide lightweight social proof; increases visible engagement and supports influencer image." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is provided: \"Sieht toll aus 😍😍👏\" (\"Looks great\"). This is a generic positive engagement message with emojis. Such comments are very common from genuine followers but are also easily produced by bots or engagement farms, so authenticity cannot be confidently determined from one example. Practical implications for ad buying: this single positive comment provides minimal evidence of an engaged, authentic audience. You need a larger sample of comments (volume, diversity of language, account profiles, timing, and conversational replies) plus metrics like overall engagement rate, follower quality, and past campaign performance to judge advertising feasibility. Recommendation: obtain the full comment set, analyze commenter account age/followers/behavior, look for repeated templates or high-frequency short praises, and cross-check with like-to-comment ratios before committing to a purchase." }

Text: Wow 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Generic praise / emoji reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses a short positive emotional reaction (compliment/admiration). Primarily serves to increase visible engagement (likes/comment count) but conveys no substantive endorsement or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "There is only a single comment: \"Wow 😍\". This is a highly generic, short emoji-based reaction that is ambiguous with respect to authenticity. Such comments are common both from genuine casual followers and from low-effort bot/farm accounts used to inflate engagement. On its own it is a weak signal for influencer quality or audience interest — it boosts vanity metrics but provides no insight into conversion potential, audience fit, or meaningful sentiment. Given the lack of contextual data (commenter profile, frequency of similar comments, timing, overall comment distribution, likes on the comment, and other engagement metrics), the probability this comment is inauthentic is moderate (score above midline) but confidence is limited. For an advertising purchase decision I would rate the evidence from comments as low-value and would not rely on it alone. Recommended next steps: obtain full comment set and commenter metadata (account age, follower count, follow/follower ratio, comment history), overall engagement rate (likes per post, saves, reach), temporal patterns (bursts of similar comments), and content diversity. Also review stories, DMs, and audience demographics before committing to a campaign." }

Text: @rukiyevizercimen

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 35, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "user tag / mention", "count": 1, "purpose": "Tagging another account (likely to draw the tagged person's attention to the post). Could be an organic share to a friend or a low-effort engagement tactic used by bots/spam accounts." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: an @-mention with no additional text. That comment type is low-information: it does not express sentiment about the content, purchase intent, or a substantive interaction. Two plausible explanations exist: (1) organic behavior where a viewer tags a friend to show them the post, which is common and legitimate; (2) low-effort automated or coordinated tagging intended to inflate visible engagement or trigger notifications. With only one tag-only comment there is limited evidence to confidently label it as genuine or fake. The relatively high fakeness_score reflects the higher prior probability that isolated tag-only comments are low-value or bot-driven, but the low fakeness_confidence indicates substantial uncertainty due to lack of additional comments or patterns to analyze. For advertising feasibility: this single, non-substantive comment is a weak signal of engaged, purchase-ready audience. Unless the rest of the post's engagement (likes, saves, replies, follower quality) shows strong, authentic interaction, this comment alone suggests caution. Overall recommendation: request more data — full comment set, engagement metrics, follower quality — before deciding on ad spend. Current assessment leans against trusting comments as evidence of a highly engaged, authentic audience." }

Text: ❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 50, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "gratitude / positive emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses thanks and positive sentiment (engagement/acknowledgement). Likely a follower or recipient responding positively to the post." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('❤️❤️❤️mega lieben Dank 😍') is short, in natural German and uses expressive emojis — characteristics more consistent with a genuine follower expressing thanks than with generic bot spam. There are no links, repeated phrases, or obvious templated text. However, this is only one comment; sample size is too small to judge overall comment authenticity or audience quality. The low fakeness score reflects the comment's natural language and emoji use, but confidence is moderate because broader patterns (multiple comments, commenter profiles, timing, language distribution, like-to-comment ratios) are not available. For advertising-feasibility decisions, obtain a larger sample of comments and commenter profiles, engagement rate, temporal posting patterns, and perform checks for repeated commenters, newly created accounts, or mass-repeated phrases before concluding. Current overall score is neutral (50) due to lack of sufficient data; confidence is low." }

Text: Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 10, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "short agreement/endorsement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express agreement with the post's sentiment; mild positive engagement and social proof." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment \"Richtig … und weniger ist oft mehr\" is a brief, contextually relevant agreement in German. It reads like genuine user reaction (not promotional, not generic template, no emojis or calls-to-action) and provides mild social proof. However, one comment is an extremely small sample and insufficient to judge overall comment authenticity, audience quality, or influencer suitability for ads. For an advertising purchase decision you should analyze a larger sample of comments (volume, diversity, repetition), engagement rates (likes/comments relative to followers), commenter profiles (real accounts vs. bots), timing patterns, and whether comments are repetitive or off-topic. Based on this single comment alone, fakeness appears low but confidence is limited, and the overall suitability for advertising cannot be reliably determined from this data point (hence a low overall score)." }

Text: 👏👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only praise", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reaction/approval with no substantive content; primarily to signal engagement or support. Low informational value; commonly used by casual followers or low-effort bot activity to inflate visible engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('👏👏👏👏') is a generic emoji-only praise. Such comments provide almost no signal about audience quality or genuine interest — they inflate engagement metrics but don't indicate meaningful interaction or purchase intent. Emoji-only responses are common from real casual followers but are also frequently produced by engagement farms or bots. Given only one comment, the assessment is very uncertain; there is a moderate suspicion (fakeness_score 60) that this type of comment could be inorganic, but confidence is limited. For advertising feasibility this single data point is weak evidence — overall suitability is low-to-moderate (overall_score 40). Recommendation: request a larger sample of recent comments (50–200), analyze comment diversity, timing, commenter profiles, repetition of identical emojis/messages across posts, like-to-comment ratios, and run follower/authenticity checks before making an ad purchase decision." }

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": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Personal/social remark", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses a personal feeling/reluctance and attempts social connection (would like to speak to women who wear kajal that way)." }, { "type": "Brand endorsement / word-of-mouth", "count": 1, "purpose": "Recommends a specific product/brand (@ohganicals emulsion) as a personal favorite for makeup removal." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment combines a natural, personal reaction (emoji, hesitation) with an unsolicited product recommendation that names a brand handle and praises its effectiveness. Linguistic cues (personal anecdote, conversational tone, no explicit call-to-action or pricing/affiliate language) lean toward an organic user endorsement rather than a paid or bot-like comment. However, the explicit brand handle and strong praise make a covert promotional intent possible, so I assign a low-to-moderate fakeness score (20) with moderate confidence. From an advertising-purchase perspective this comment is a small positive signal (real user mentions a product), but it is only one data point: engagement volume, comment diversity, follower authenticity, and pattern of similar brand mentions are needed to judge overall audience quality. Based on the single comment, the post’s suitability for advertising is moderate-to-low (score 45) with limited confidence; recommend collecting more comments and engagement metrics before making a buying decision." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 20, "fakeness_confidence": 65, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 60, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Compliment / Agreement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Positive reinforcement of the post's message (agreement that 'with the right makeup one can achieve a lot'), serves as social proof and supportive engagement." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment ('Du hast recht mit dem richtigen Make-up 😍kann man viel erreichen 👏') is a short, positive, topical reaction that aligns with a beauty/makeup post. Linguistic cues ('Du hast recht' — 'you're right') suggest it's replying to or agreeing with the post rather than a generic spam line; use of emojis and applause increases perceived authenticity. However, the message is also generic and low-effort, which is a pattern sometimes seen in inorganic engagement or cordial but superficial follower comments. With only one comment available, the sample is too small to draw firm conclusions about overall comment authenticity or audience quality. For advertising decisions, treat this as weak positive signal: it shows at least some topical engagement but does not demonstrate deep interaction, diverse audience interest, or purchasing intent. Recommended next steps: inspect the commenter account (age, follower count, activity), review timing and repetition of similar comments across posts, check comment diversity and reply threads, and analyze like-to-comment ratios and comment sentiment across multiple posts to better assess authenticity and suitability for ad spend." }

Text: Супер 👍

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 25, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short generic positive (praise + emoji)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express quick approval/positive reaction; low-effort engagement that signals support but conveys no detailed feedback or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single short comment ('Супер 👍') is available. This is a low-effort, generic positive reaction: plausible genuine support from a follower but also a type commonly produced by bots or engagement-for-hire. With one data point there is very low signal for assessing audience quality or real purchase intent. Recommendation: treat this as weak positive sentiment only. Before purchasing advertising, analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple posts (volume, diversity, timing), inspect commenter profiles for authenticity, review like-to-comment ratios, and check engagement trends over time. Current evidence is insufficient to confidently endorse this influencer for ad buys." }

Text: Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 15, "fakeness_confidence": 60, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Complimentary / Supportive", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express admiration and personal support for the influencer (social proof, positive sentiment)." } ], "interpretation": "Один комментарий: «Инночка , красотка.🔥🔥❤️❤️👏👏» — короткая, позитивная похвала с эмодзи. По форме это похоже на реального подписчика: обращение по имени/уменьшительно‑ласкательное, персональная похвала и эмоциональные эмодзи. Факторов, указывающих на явную фальсификацию (типовые бот-фразы, ссылки, одинаковые шаблоны, неадекватная длина), тут нет, поэтому оценка фейковости низкая (≈15). \n\nОднако выводы очень ограничены из‑за объёма данных — один комментарий не даёт картины вовлечённости, разнообразия аудитории или паттернов активности. Для решения о покупке рекламы нужно дополнительно проверить: профиль комментатора (реальные посты/подписчики), распределение и темп комментариев под разными постами, соотношение комментариев/лайков к числу подписчиков, наличие повторяющихся коротких шаблонных комментариев, время поступления комментариев. \n\nРекомендация: не полагаться на этот единичный комментарий как на доказательство органического вовлечения. Запросите полный срез комментариев (несколько постов), метрики вовлечённости и выборку профилей комментаторов перед окончательным решением о покупке рекламы." }

Text: 👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 30, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji reaction (applause)", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses approval/positive reaction and provides lightweight engagement/social proof. Low-effort — does not indicate purchase intent or detailed endorsement." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available: two clapping-hand emojis. This is a weak signal. Emoji applause commonly appears from genuine followers but is also frequently produced by low-effort accounts or automated engagement services. On its own it neither confirms nor disproves authenticity; it provides minimal social proof but no meaningful consumer intent or product-related feedback. For advertising feasibility this comment set is insufficient — I recommend analyzing a larger sample of comments across recent posts, checking commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, avatars, posting history), looking for repetitive/generic comments, comment timing patterns, and comment-to-like ratios before deciding. Given the minimal data, I rate the probability of inauthenticity as moderate (40/100) and give a cautious overall suitability score for ad purchase (25/100) with low-to-moderate confidence." }

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

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 5, "fakeness_confidence": 75, "overall_score": 45, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Question / logistical inquiry", "count": 1, "purpose": "Asking whether an event/on-post item is happening today and requesting directions — indicates genuine interest or intent to attend." } ], "interpretation": "This single comment is a straightforward, context-specific question in German: \"Ist es nicht heute? wenn ja, wie komm ich dahin?\" (Isn't it today? If yes, how do I get there?). That content and phrasing suggest a real user trying to confirm timing/location rather than a generic promotional or bot comment. Given only one comment, signal is extremely limited: while this one appears authentic (hence a low fakeness score), it is insufficient to judge overall audience quality or the influencer's comment authenticity at scale. For ad-buy decisions, this comment alone is mildly positive (shows real local interest/engagement) but not decisive. Recommended next steps: collect a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts; check commenter account(s) for profile completeness, follower/following ratios, recent activity and language consistency; review like-to-comment ratios, timing patterns, and presence of repetitive/generic comments indicating bot activity. If most comments resemble this (specific, local, conversational), that supports higher confidence for ad spend; if many are generic/language-misaligned/emojis-only, treat engagement skeptically." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 65, "fakeness_confidence": 55, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji-only engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express quick approval/enthusiasm and increase visible engagement; common both for genuine followers and for automated/engagement-pod comments." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment is available and it consists of three fire emojis (\"🔥🔥🔥\"). This is a low-information signal: it does indicate positive reaction but provides no demographic, intent, or purchase interest. Emoji-only comments are frequently used by real followers as lightweight praise, but they are also commonly posted by bots, engagement pods, or paid commenters to inflate apparent engagement. Given the single short comment, the likelihood of inauthenticity is above neutral (fakeness_score 65) but the confidence is limited because the sample size is one. For advertising decisions, this data point is insufficient. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments across multiple recent posts; inspect commenter accounts (age, follower counts, posting history, avatars, usernames); check comment timing patterns and repetition across posts; compute engagement rate (likes/comments per follower) and compare to platform norms; look for substantive comments, questions, or brand mentions that indicate genuine interest. Based solely on this comment, I would not consider the comments a reliable signal of a real, engaged audience and would treat ad purchase decisions with caution." }

Text: Unglaublich 👏👏👏

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 60, "fakeness_confidence": 40, "overall_score": 30, "overall_confidence": 35, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Short generic praise / emoji", "count": 1, "purpose": "Express positive reaction and boost visible engagement; low informational value regarding genuine interest or purchase intent." } ], "interpretation": "The single comment 'Unglaublich 👏👏👏' is a generic positive reaction. Such short, non-specific praise is common from genuine fans but is also a common pattern for automated or purchased engagement. On its own it provides very low signal about follower quality, audience intent, or suitability for advertising. For a confident assessment you should examine additional comments for variety and specificity, check commenter profiles (age, follower/following ratio, posting history), timing patterns (many similar comments in a short period), and engagement ratios (likes-to-comments, comments per follower). Given only this one comment, treat the engagement as low-quality/uncertain for ad targeting purposes." }

Text: 🔥🔥🔥

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 40, "fakeness_confidence": 50, "overall_score": 35, "overall_confidence": 40, "comment_types": [ { "type": "emoji_reaction", "count": 1, "purpose": "Expresses approval/excitement or 'hype' for the post; increases visible engagement but carries little substantive feedback." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment was provided: three fire emojis (🔥🔥🔥). Emoji-only comments are common as quick positive reactions and can be organic (fans showing enthusiasm) or low-effort bot/farm output. With one short emoji there is very little signal: it indicates some positive sentiment but no substantive audience interaction, no questions, no product-related feedback, and no indicators of follower intent or purchase interest. Fakeness is plausible but not strongly indicated — short/high-frequency emoji comments are used by both real followers and automated accounts. Given the extremely small sample size, confidence in any judgment is limited. For advertising purchase decisions, comments like this neither strongly support nor strongly discourage investment: they show surface-level engagement but do not demonstrate meaningful audience quality, intent, or conversation. Recommend requesting a larger sample of recent post comments, engagement rates (likes vs. followers), follower demographics, and examples of longer, topical comments before making an ad-buy decision." }

Text: Erledigt

Analysis: { "fakeness_score": 35, "fakeness_confidence": 45, "overall_score": 25, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Action confirmation / low-effort engagement", "count": 1, "purpose": "To acknowledge or confirm completion of a task (e.g., completed a requested action, entered a giveaway, or followed instructions). Provides minimal informational value; could also be a quick reaction or automated/bot reply." } ], "interpretation": "Only a single comment ('Erledigt' = 'Done') is available, which is a low-effort, transactional message. This comment could be genuine (a real user confirming an action) but is ambiguous and is also consistent with automated or scripted replies used in contests or call-to-action posts. Given the lack of conversational content, diversity, or additional context (no multiple commenters, no questions, no organic discussion), the engagement quality appears weak and insufficient by itself to justify an advertising purchase. Recommended next steps: review a larger sample of recent comments, check commenter profiles (account age, follower counts, posting behavior), analyze like-to-comment ratios, timestamp patterns, and look for repetitive phrasing that indicates automation before making an ad-buy 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: +

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: War ein sehr schöner Abend ❤️

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

Text: +

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": 70, "overall_score": 40, "overall_confidence": 50, "comment_types": [ { "type": "Product inquiry / compliment", "count": 1, "purpose": "Compliment the color and request purchase information — indicates genuine interest in the item and potential buying intent." } ], "interpretation": "Single comment: 'Was ist das für eine schöne Farbe? Wo gibt es die!!!' is phrased naturally in German, expresses admiration and directly asks where to buy. It lacks bot signatures (no links, repetitive patterns, or generic emojis) and reads like a real user inquiry, so fakeness is low (15/100) with moderate confidence. However, this is only one comment — sample size is too small to judge overall audience quality or authenticity. From an advertising-feasibility perspective the comment is positive (shows purchase intent) but does not prove broad, engaged, or authentic audience activity. Overall assessment is cautious: moderate-low suitability (40/100) with limited confidence because more data is needed. Recommended next steps: analyze a larger sample of comments (50–200), reviewer profiles for authenticity, engagement rate (likes/comments/follower ratio), timing patterns, and look for clusters of repetitive/templated comments that would raise fakeness concerns." }