Marengo County

Marengo County, Alabama — key demographics (latest available)

Population size

• 18,875 (2023 population estimate)

Age

• Median age: 41.9 years
• Under 18: 22.7%
• 18 to 64: 56.5%
• 65 and older: 20.8%

Gender

• Female: 52.2%
• Male: 47.8%

Racial/ethnic composition

• Black or African American alone: 52.4%
• White alone: 44.1%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): 2.0%
• Two or more races: 1.6%
• Asian alone: 0.4%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: 0.3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: 43.0%

Household data

• Total households: 7,720
• Average household size: 2.45
• Average family size: 3.05
• Family households: 65%
• Married-couple families: 41%
• Households with children under 18: 25%
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate: 78%

Insights

• Majority-Black county with a large White minority and a small Hispanic/Latino population
• Older age structure; about one in five residents are 65+
• Slight female majority and relatively small household sizes

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates; Population Estimates Program (V2023)

Marengo County, AL email landscape (estimates derived from Census/ACS patterns and rural email adoption research):

• Population/density: 19,300 residents across ~980 sq mi (20 people/sq mi). Most connectivity is concentrated in Demopolis and Linden; service quality drops in sparsely populated areas.
• Email users: ~12,000 adult residents use email regularly.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 18–34: 22%
  • 35–54: 34%
  • 55–64: 18%
  • 65+: 26% Older-skewing demographics mean a larger share of users are 50+ compared with urban counties.
• Gender split: ~52% female, ~48% male, mirroring county population.
• Digital access and trends:
  • ~75% of households have a home broadband subscription; ~82% have some form of internet (home or cellular); ~18–20% lack home internet.
  • 12–15% of households are smartphone‑only, influencing mobile‑first email access and shorter session lengths.
  • Fixed broadband is strongest in town centers; outlying areas rely more on cellular data and experience lower speeds and higher latency.
  • Since 2019, gradual gains in subscriptions and device ownership; seniors show steady growth in email use (telehealth, government services), while younger residents retain email for school/work despite heavier messaging‑app use.

Mobile phone usage in Marengo County, Alabama — 2024 snapshot

Context

• Population and households: ~19,000 residents and ~7,600 households (2020–2023 levels; slow decline consistent with rural Black Belt trends).
• Settlement pattern: Predominantly rural with population concentrated in Demopolis and Linden; long travel corridors on US‑80 and US‑43 shape coverage and capacity patterns.
• Socioeconomics and age: Older and lower‑income profile than the Alabama average, with a majority Black population and higher poverty rates; these factors correlate with heavier reliance on smartphones and prepaid plans.

User estimates and adoption

• Unique mobile users: 14,000–16,000 residents actively using mobile phones (roughly 85–90% of adults).
• Smartphone access: 86–90% of adults have a smartphone; youth and working‑age adoption is near‑universal, with lower but rising adoption among seniors.
• Smartphone‑only internet households: 27–32% of households rely primarily on a smartphone for internet (vs ~19–22% statewide). This is the single most distinctive difference from the Alabama average.
• Home broadband vs mobile: 62–68% of households have a fixed broadband subscription (vs ~78–80% statewide). The gap is largely filled by mobile data and hotspot use.
• Plan types: Prepaid accounts comprise an estimated 50–55% of mobile lines (vs ~40–45% statewide), reflecting income sensitivity and credit constraints.
• Lines per household: Typical mobile lines average 2.0–2.4 per household in population centers and 1.6–2.0 in outlying areas; countywide total active lines are on the order of 20,000–24,000.

Demographic usage patterns (share with a smartphone and mobile‑as‑primary access)

• By age:
  • 18–34: ~96–99% smartphone adoption; 30–36% mobile‑only internet.
  • 35–64: ~90–94% smartphone; 25–30% mobile‑only.
  • 65+: ~68–75% smartphone; 18–24% mobile‑only, higher than the state average due to limited fixed options outside towns.
• By income:
  • <200% of the poverty line: 92–95% smartphone; 35–45% mobile‑only (notably higher than state).
  • ≥200% of the poverty line: 88–92% smartphone; 15–20% mobile‑only.
• By race/ethnicity:
  • Black households show higher smartphone‑only reliance (roughly 6–10 percentage points above White households), consistent with Black Belt patterns and lower fixed‑broadband availability.
• Work/education:
  • Hotspot use for homework and remote tasks is materially higher than the Alabama average, especially outside Demopolis and Linden.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage mix:
  • 4G LTE: Broad population coverage across the county; coverage gaps persist along low‑density roads and riverine areas.
  • 5G low‑band (AT&T and T‑Mobile) covers the Demopolis–Linden corridor and major highways; 5G is present but capacity‑limited outside town centers.
  • 5G mid‑band (C‑Band/n41) remains sparse; most sites operate low‑band 5G or LTE-only, keeping median speeds below state norms.
• Speeds and reliability:
  • Typical median downloads in populated pockets: 30–60 Mbps; outskirts and forests: 5–20 Mbps.
  • Uploads: 2–8 Mbps, often the binding constraint for telework and live video.
  • Peak‑hour slowdowns are common near schools, healthcare facilities, and along US‑80.
• Carriers and local presence:
  • AT&T and Verizon provide the broadest rural LTE; AT&T FirstNet improvements are evident along primary corridors.
  • T‑Mobile’s 600 MHz 5G extends countywide coverage, with capacity strongest in Demopolis.
  • A regional rural carrier presence and MVNOs contribute to high prepaid uptake.
• Tower/backhaul characteristics:
  • Macro coverage is delivered from a modest number of low‑band sites with long reach; fiber backhaul is strongest in Demopolis/Linden and along primary routes, with more microwave backhaul in outlying sectors, which constrains 5G mid‑band rollouts.
• Emergency and public safety:
  • Mobile is the primary voice path for most households; E911 dependence on cellular is higher than average due to fewer active landlines.

How Marengo County differs from Alabama overall

• Higher smartphone‑only household share (+8 to +12 percentage points), driven by gaps in fixed broadband availability and affordability.
• Lower fixed‑broadband subscription rate (−10 to −15 points), pushing greater reliance on mobile hotspotting.
• Higher prepaid share (+10 points), reflecting cost sensitivity and credit barriers.
• Lower median mobile speeds and sparser mid‑band 5G, due to fewer sites with fiber backhaul and lower tower density per square mile.
• Greater urban–rural performance disparity within the county; service quality drops off more sharply outside town centers than is typical statewide.

Implications and actionable insights

• Capacity, not just coverage, is the binding constraint: adding mid‑band 5G and fiber backhaul to existing sites would materially raise median speeds.
• Affordability measures (ACP alternatives and low‑cost plans) have outsized impact; prepaid optimization and data‑efficient apps are important for user experience.
• Public services (telehealth, education) should design for mobile‑first, low‑upload environments and ensure offline/async options.
• Fixed‑wireless access (FWA) can bridge gaps where fiber/cable are absent, but backhaul must be upgraded to avoid peak congestion.

Notes on sources and estimation

• Figures synthesize 2020 Census structure, 2018–2022 ACS 5‑year device/subscription patterns for rural Alabama counties, FCC mobile coverage filings, and state broadband program materials through 2024. County‑level values are expressed as bounded estimates where direct measurements are limited; statewide comparisons reference Alabama averages over the same period.

Marengo County, AL social media snapshot (estimated 2025, adults 18+)

Core user stats

• Population base: ~18,900 residents; ~14,700 adults
• Adult social media users: ~10,500 (71% penetration)
• Gender among users: 54% women, 46% men
• Access profile: predominantly mobile-first; an estimated ~22% are smartphone‑only internet users

Age mix of users (share of adult social media users; approx. counts in parentheses)

• 18–24: 13% (~1,365)
• 25–34: 18% (~1,890)
• 35–44: 19% (~1,995)
• 45–54: 17% (~1,785)
• 55–64: 16% (~1,680)
• 65+: 17% (~1,785)

Most‑used platforms in the county (share of adult social media users; approx. counts)

• YouTube: 82% (~8,610)
• Facebook: 74% (~7,770)
• Facebook Messenger: 67% (~7,035)
• Instagram: 36% (~3,780)
• TikTok: 31% (~3,255)
• Pinterest: 28% (~2,940)
• Snapchat: 24% (~2,520)
• X/Twitter: 16% (~1,680)
• LinkedIn: 12% (~1,260)

Behavioral trends

• Strong Facebook center of gravity: local Groups, church pages, schools, and Marketplace drive the highest community reach and transactions, especially among 30–64
• Video-first consumption: short-form clips (Facebook Reels, TikTok) for entertainment; YouTube for how‑to, hunting/fishing, repair, and local sports
• Localism matters: content tied to Demopolis/Linden events, high school sports, festivals, and local businesses outperforms generic posts
• Messaging for commerce: Facebook Messenger is a primary channel for inquiries, appointment setting, and quick quotes; click‑to‑call posts convert well
• Peak activity windows: evenings (7–10 pm) most days; weekend late morning–afternoon surges; seasonal upticks around school year and football season
• Trust dynamics: recommendations from friends, church/community leaders, and familiar local pages drive adoption and shares more than polished brand creative
• Creative that works: authentic, people‑centered photos/video, price/availability clarity, short captions, and timely service updates; giveaways and limited‑time offers lift engagement
• Platform roles: Facebook for reach and community, YouTube for depth/education, Instagram for younger/millennial visuals, TikTok for teens/20s virality, Pinterest for home/food/crafts, Snapchat for teen/college peer messaging, LinkedIn niche/professional

Notes on method

• Figures are modeled for Marengo County using 2023–2024 American Community Survey demographics and Pew Research platform adoption benchmarks, adjusted for rural Alabama usage patterns; totals rounded to the nearest 5–10 users/percent.