Monroe County

Monroe County, Alabama (FIPS 01099) – key demographics

Population

• 2020 Census: 20,184
• 2023 estimate: 19,772 (−2.0% since 2020)

Age

• Median age: ~42 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Gender

• Female: ~51.5%
• Male: ~48.5%

Race/ethnicity (shares of total population)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~55–56%
• Black or African American: ~39–41%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~1.5–2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.7–1%
• Asian: ~0.3–0.5%
• Two or more races: ~1.5–2%

Households

• Households: ~7,700–7,800
• Average household size: ~2.45
• Family households: ~65% of households
• Nonfamily households: ~35%
• Single-person households: ~30–31%
• 65+ living alone: ~12–13%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~77–78%

Insights

• Population is slowly declining and relatively older than the U.S. overall.
• Slight female majority.
• Racial composition is majority White with a large Black population and small Hispanic share.
• Household size is modest, with a substantial share of single-person and nonfamily households.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; Population Estimates Program (2023); American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates (Tables DP05, S0101, S1101).

Monroe County, Alabama (2020 Census): 19,772 residents; land area ≈1,026 sq mi; population density ≈19 people/sq mi (rural).

Estimated email users

• Adults (18+): ≈14,200 users (about 92% of ≈15,400 adults)
• Total users (including teens): ≈15,000

Age distribution of email users (share of users)

• Under 18: 6%
• 18–29: 17%
• 30–49: 32%
• 50–64: 24%
• 65+: 21%

Gender split of users

• Roughly mirrors the county: ≈51% female, 49% male

Digital access and connectivity

• Rural density and dispersed housing increase last‑mile costs, contributing to patchier fixed broadband than Alabama’s metro counties; several census blocks remained un/underserved on 2023 FCC maps.
• Email access is predominantly smartphone‑centric, with strong 4G/5G coverage in towns and along major corridors; fixed broadband is more limited in outlying areas.
• Public institutions (schools, libraries) and community Wi‑Fi hotspots play a notable role in access.
• State/federal investments (e.g., BEAD-era projects) are expanding fiber and fixed wireless, improving reliability and speeds through 2025–2028.

Overall: Email is near‑universal among adults; usage skews highest among 30–49, with strong adoption even among 65+ residents, constrained mainly by fixed‑line access in the most rural parts of the county.

Mobile phone usage in Monroe County, Alabama (2025 snapshot)

Context and demographics

• Population: 19,800 residents (2023 estimate), about 77% adults (15,300 people).
• Demographic mix: roughly 55% White, 41% Black, ~2% Hispanic, ~2% other/multiracial.
• Socioeconomics: median household income around $42,000; poverty rate near 24%.
• Settlement pattern: predominantly rural (on the order of 85–90% of residents outside dense urban cores), with population concentrated in and around Monroeville and along US‑84 and AL‑21.

User estimates and adoption

• Adults with any mobile phone: 94% (14,400 adults), slightly below the state average.
• Smartphone users: 83% of adults (12,700 people). Rural, older age, and lower income profiles keep this a few points below the state level.
• Basic phone (non‑smartphone) users: 11% of adults (1,700), notably above the state share due to the older population and budget constraints.
• Adults without a mobile phone: 6% (900), skewing older and in the lowest‑income brackets.
• Household voice pattern: wireless‑only homes (no landline) 78% of households (5,700 of ~7,300 households), modestly higher than Alabama overall.
• Smartphone‑only internet reliance: about 30% of adults (~4,600) primarily use a smartphone for home internet needs, materially above the statewide share (mid‑20s percent). This reflects the limited fixed broadband options in outlying areas.

Usage behavior highlights

• Heavier reliance on mobile data for everyday internet (government services, school communications, e‑commerce, and streaming at modest bitrates), especially outside Monroeville where cable or fiber is sparse.
• Longer device upgrade cycles and a higher share of LTE‑only handsets versus the state’s metro areas, tied to income and retail access patterns.
• Text and app‑based communication dominate; voice quality can fluctuate in forested or river‑bottom areas where signal is marginal.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Carrier presence: AT&T (including FirstNet for public safety), Verizon, and T‑Mobile provide countywide 4G LTE coverage on primary corridors and population centers.
• 5G availability:
  • Low‑band 5G is broadly present around Monroeville and along US‑84/AL‑21.
  • Mid‑band 5G capacity (e.g., n41/n77) is limited to the core of Monroeville and a few corridor nodes; most of the county operates on LTE or low‑band 5G with LTE‑like capacity.
• Coverage gaps and reliability:
  • Notable weak spots in low‑lying pine forests and along the Alabama River bottoms; secondary roads north and south of US‑84 can drop to 1–2 bars or fall back to LTE/3G voice equivalents.
  • In‑building penetration can be challenging in older structures and metal‑roofed homes; residents often depend on Wi‑Fi calling where fixed broadband is available.
• Capacity and speeds:
  • Typical outdoor download speeds in Monroeville and along major corridors: roughly 20–80 Mbps.
  • Fringe and forested areas: often 5–20 Mbps with higher latency, especially at peak times; uplink can dip below 5–10 Mbps.
  • Compared with Alabama’s urban corridors (commonly 80–150+ Mbps on mid‑band 5G), Monroe County’s median mobile speeds are lower, and capacity is more variable.
• Cell site footprint and backhaul:
  • A few dozen macro towers are distributed along highways and near towns; small cells are sparse outside core civic areas.
  • Backhaul is mixed: fibered sites on major corridors; microwave backhaul persists at some rural towers, constraining peak‑hour throughput.
• Fixed broadband interplay:
  • Cable and some fiber are available in Monroeville; many rural households remain on aging DSL or satellite. This drives higher smartphone‑only and hotspot use than the state average.

How Monroe County differs from the Alabama state pattern

• Higher mobile dependence: more wireless‑only homes (+5 percentage points) and higher smartphone‑only internet reliance (+5–8 percentage points) than the state overall.
• Capacity over coverage tradeoff: 5G is present, but capacity‑rich mid‑band 5G covers a smaller share of residents than in Alabama’s metro counties; LTE remains the workhorse outside town centers.
• Lower typical speeds and more variability: median mobile performance is meaningfully below urban Alabama, with sharper slowdowns during peak hours on microwave‑backhauled rural sites.
• Device and plan mix: a larger share of cost‑conscious users and longer device retention cycles than statewide norms, which slows migration to the latest 5G features.

Key takeaways

• Expect near‑universal mobile access but fewer smartphones and more basic phones than the state average.
• Plan for higher smartphone‑only internet usage and hotspot dependence in rural tracts.
• Network investments that add mid‑band 5G sectors and replace microwave with fiber backhaul near rural towers will yield outsized gains relative to Alabama’s urban markets.
• Public service delivery (alerts, telehealth, school communications) should remain mobile‑first, with offline fallbacks for pockets of weak coverage.

Monroe County, Alabama — Social Media Snapshot (2025, modeled local estimates)

User base and access

• Residents: ~19.7k (ACS 2023 est.)
• Active social media users (13+): 13.0k (66% of residents)
• Adults (18+) using social media: 11.8k (77% of adults)
• Mobile-first usage: ~90% of local social media users primarily access via smartphone
• Average platforms per user: ~2.8

Age and gender profile of social media users

• By age (share of local social users): 13–17: 9%; 18–29: 17%; 30–44: 25%; 45–64: 30%; 65+: 19%
• Gender: ~54% female, ~46% male

Most-used platforms in Monroe County (share of local social media users, monthly)

• Facebook: 78%
• YouTube: 76%
• Instagram: 34%
• TikTok: 31%
• Snapchat: 23%
• X (Twitter): 14% Notes: Facebook Groups/Pages and Facebook Marketplace see especially high local use; WhatsApp presence is modest (~12%).

Behavioral trends

• Community-first: Heavy reliance on Facebook for local news, school and church updates, high school sports, civic info, lost-and-found, and severe weather alerts. County and city pages, local media, and first responders drive engagement.
• Marketplace culture: Strong buy/sell activity for vehicles, equipment, furniture, and yard/estate sales; listings with clear photos and local pickup details perform best.
• Video habits: YouTube for how‑to/DIY, home/auto repair, hunting/fishing, and local sports highlights; TikTok/Reels for short entertainment and regional humor; Instagram Reels more prominent with 18–34.
• Participation style: Predominantly passive consumption (scrolling, reacting, sharing) with a smaller cohort posting original content; private group chats and Messenger coordinate events and community efforts.
• Timing: Engagement clusters before work (7–9 a.m.), evenings (7–10 p.m.), and weekends; local event days and severe weather spikes drive surges.
• Older-skewed mix: Facebook and YouTube dominate 45+; Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat concentrated in under‑35.
• Trust signals: Local faces, recognizable places, and plain‑spoken copy outperform generic creatives; posts with service info (hours, phone, map) and immediate utility earn more saves/shares.

Method note

• Figures are best-available 2025 local estimates derived from U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2023 demographics and Pew Research Center 2024 social platform usage patterns, adjusted for rural/Southern profiles. Percentages are rounded and represent “use at least monthly” unless otherwise stated.