Pike County

Pike County, Alabama — key demographics

Population size

• 33,009 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: ~31 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~19%
• 18–24: ~24% (elevated due to Troy University)
• 25–44: ~25%
• 45–64: ~18%
• 65 and over: ~14%

Gender

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49% (ACS 2018–2022)

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022)

• White alone: ~58%
• Black or African American alone: ~36%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~3–4%
• Two or more races: ~2%
• Asian: ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: <1%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: ~0%

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Total households: ~12,700
• Average household size: ~2.4
• Family households: ~61% of households; married-couple households: ~40%
• Nonfamily households: ~39%
• Households with children under 18: ~27–28%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~61%

Notes and sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 5-year estimates. Figures rounded for clarity.

Pike County, Alabama (pop. ~34,000; density ~50 people per sq. mile) is anchored by Troy and rural communities along US‑231, with markedly stronger connectivity in and around Troy than in outlying areas.

Estimated email users: ~24,000 adult users. Basis: ~26,000 adults and ~92% email adoption among online adults.

Age distribution of email users (share of adult users):

• 18–24: ~24% (university‑driven)
• 25–44: ~34%
• 45–64: ~28%
• 65+: ~14%

Gender split of email users: ~51% female, ~49% male, mirroring county demographics.

Digital access and trends:

• ~78% of households have a broadband subscription; smartphone‑only internet access ~18–20%, reflecting rural last‑mile gaps.
• Fixed broadband (≥100/20 Mbps) covers most of Troy and primary corridors; fiber availability is concentrated in and near Troy and expanding outward.
• 5G/serviceable LTE is common in population centers; coverage thins in low‑density areas.
• Affordability pressures increased after the federal ACP wind‑down in 2024, with mobile‑only reliance rising among lower‑income households.
• Email is near‑universal among working‑age adults and students; usage is lowest but growing among residents 65+, tracking recent gains in device ownership.

Overall, Pike County exhibits high email adoption with urban‑rural connectivity disparities shaping access patterns.

Mobile phone usage in Pike County, Alabama — summary with estimates, demographics, and infrastructure, highlighting how the county differs from state-level patterns.

Headline estimates (2024)

• Population baseline: ~33,000 residents; ~26,400 adults (18+); ~13,000 households.
• Adult cellphone ownership: ~97% of adults ≈ 25,600 users.
• Adult smartphone ownership: ~88–90% of adults ≈ 23,000–24,000 users.
• Total smartphone users (age 13+): ~25,000–26,000 people (about 77–79% of the total population).
• Mobile-only internet households (cellular data plan and no fixed home internet): ~17–19% of households ≈ 2,200–2,500 households. Statewide Alabama is closer to ~14–16%.

Demographic breakdown (drivers of usage)

• Age structure (younger than Alabama overall due to Troy University):
  • 18–24: ~21% of county; smartphone ownership ≈ 95–97% ⇒ ~6,500–6,700 users.
  • 25–44: ~25% of county; smartphone ownership ≈ 96–98% ⇒ ~7,900–8,100 users.
  • 45–64: ~20% of county; smartphone ownership ≈ 82–87% ⇒ ~5,400–5,700 users.
  • 65+: ~14% of county; smartphone ownership ≈ 58–64% ⇒ ~2,700–3,000 users.
  • Teens 13–17: ~7% of county; smartphone ownership ≈ ~95% ⇒ ~2,100–2,200 users.
  • Net effect: Higher overall smartphone penetration than the state average because of an outsized 18–29 cohort.
• Race/ethnicity context:
  • County composition (2020 Census order-of-magnitude): White ~58–60%, Black ~33–35%, Hispanic/Latino ~2–3%, Asian ~1–2%.
  • Consistent with national patterns, Black and Hispanic residents are more likely to be smartphone-dependent for internet compared with White residents. In Pike, that likely translates to above-average mobile-only internet reliance in lower-income and majority-minority blocks versus city-center areas with fiber.
• Income and housing:
  • Median household income is below the Alabama median, pushing more households toward mobile-only internet and prepaid plans.
  • A large student renter population increases prepaid/MVNO usage and reliance on mobile hotspots and campus Wi‑Fi rather than traditional cable in rentals.

Digital infrastructure and availability

• Technologies and coverage:
  • 4G LTE: Countywide population coverage is effectively universal on major carriers along U.S. 231, AL‑87, and within Troy/Brundidge; geographic dead zones persist on rural roads and forested areas, especially toward the county periphery.
  • 5G: Broad low-band 5G from multiple carriers across most populated areas; mid-band 5G is available in and around Troy (university area and U.S. 231 corridor), with sparser mid-band availability in rural tracts. This yields strong 5G performance in town and LTE fallback outside.
• Carriers and competition:
  • AT&T and Verizon maintain wide rural coverage; T‑Mobile’s mid-band 5G footprint is comparatively strong in Troy, improving indoor speeds where deployed. MVNOs (e.g., Visible, Cricket, Metro) have notable share due to students and cost-sensitive users.
• Backhaul and fixed-line interplay:
  • Legacy Troy Cable assets (now under C Spire) and ongoing fiber builds give Troy and some adjacent areas better fixed broadband than many rural Alabama counties. That improves Wi‑Fi offload in town but does not fully address outlying coverage gaps.
• Public connectivity:
  • High-density Wi‑Fi on the Troy University campus, public libraries, schools, and select civic venues reduces mobile data burden for students and low-income users in town.
• Resilience notes:
  • Severe weather can degrade service on single‑feed sites in rural sectors. The denser grid in Troy generally restores faster than outlying communities.

How Pike County differs from Alabama overall

• Younger skew and a large student population raise smartphone ownership and daily mobile data use above the state average.
• Mobile-only internet reliance is modestly higher than the state share, driven by students and rural households, despite decent city fiber.
• T‑Mobile’s mid-band 5G presence is stronger than in many peer rural counties, making the competitive balance in the city core more three‑way; statewide, AT&T and Verizon remain more dominant in rural zones.
• Coverage quality diverges sharply inside versus outside Troy: in-town speeds are often “5G fast,” while rural edges experience more LTE-only or weak-signal pockets than the Alabama average.
• Prepaid/MVNO penetration is higher than the state average due to student renters and lower median incomes, affecting average revenue per user and device upgrade cycles.

Notes on methods and sources

• Population, age, and race/ethnicity baselines align with 2020 Census and recent ACS patterns; smartphone and cellphone ownership rates apply Pew Research 2023 U.S. rates to Pike’s age structure; teen smartphone rates use recent national teen surveys. Household mobile-only internet shares are inferred from ACS patterns for Alabama and adjusted for Pike’s student/rural mix and local fiber presence. FCC mobile coverage maps and carrier deployment statements inform technology availability and corridor-versus-rural differences.

Social media usage in Pike County, Alabama (2025 snapshot)

Context

• Population: roughly 33,000 residents; college-centered economy (Troy University) yields a larger 18–24 cohort than the state average. Gender split ~51% female, 49% male (U.S. Census Bureau, most recent ACS).
• Note on method: County-level platform stats aren’t directly published; figures below are modeled estimates for Pike County using Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. adoption rates, adjusted for the county’s younger age mix and rural-Southeast patterns. Percentages refer to residents ages 13+ unless otherwise noted.

Overall adoption and user counts

• Any social media: 78–84% of residents 13+ use at least one platform monthly, ≈23,000–25,000 people.
• Adults (18+): 80–86% use social; teens (13–17): ≈95%+ use at least one platform.

Most-used platforms (share of residents 13+; modeled)

• YouTube: 86–90%
• Facebook: 68–74%
• Instagram: 54–60%
• TikTok: 44–50%
• Snapchat: 40–46%
• Pinterest: 28–33%
• LinkedIn: 20–25%
• X (Twitter): 16–20%
• Reddit: 13–17%
• Nextdoor: 5–8% (higher in Troy proper; low countywide)

Age-group usage patterns (share using each platform; modeled)

• 13–17: YouTube 95%+, Snapchat 75–82%, TikTok 70–78%, Instagram 65–72%, Facebook 35–45%
• 18–24: YouTube 95–98%, Instagram 80–86%, Snapchat 75–82%, TikTok 70–78%, Facebook 45–55%
• 25–34: YouTube 90–94%, Facebook 70–78%, Instagram 58–64%, TikTok 42–50%, Snapchat 32–40%
• 35–49: YouTube 88–92%, Facebook 75–82%, Instagram 45–52%, TikTok 28–35%, Snapchat 18–25%
• 50–64: YouTube 80–86%, Facebook 70–76%, Instagram 30–38%, TikTok 16–22%, Snapchat 10–15%
• 65+: YouTube 65–72%, Facebook 58–66%, Instagram 16–24%, TikTok 6–10%, Snapchat 4–7%

Gender breakdown (share of each platform’s local user base; modeled)

• Facebook: ~54–56% women, 44–46% men
• Instagram: ~52–55% women, 45–48% men
• TikTok: ~55–58% women, 42–45% men
• Snapchat: ~55–58% women, 42–45% men
• Pinterest: ~68–72% women, 28–32% men
• YouTube: ~47–49% women, 51–53% men
• X (Twitter): ~38–42% women, 58–62% men
• LinkedIn: ~45–49% women, 51–55% men
• Reddit: ~28–34% women, 66–72% men

Behavioral trends and local insights

• Heavy campus influence: The university skews usage toward Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube shorts; late-evening posting and viewing (9 p.m.–1 a.m.) are common, especially on weeknights.
• Facebook as the community hub: Older adults and families use Facebook for local news, church and civic groups, Marketplace, high-school sports, and severe-weather updates. Local businesses and public agencies rely on Facebook Events and Messenger for service and announcements.
• Video-first consumption: Short-form vertical video (IG Reels, TikTok, YouTube Shorts) dominates discovery for food, nightlife, college athletics, and local events. Long-form YouTube remains strong for sports highlights, DIY/auto, outdoor recreation, and streamed church services.
• Messaging habits: Facebook Messenger and Snapchat are primary for direct communication; Instagram DMs are widely used among students and local businesses for customer service and reservations.
• Commerce behavior: Facebook Marketplace is widely used for housing sublets, textbooks, furniture, and used vehicles; Instagram and TikTok drive impulse buys via local boutiques and eateries with promotions and creator partnerships.
• Content that performs: Game-day and campus-life clips, local dining deals, behind-the-scenes from high-school and Troy University athletics, weather and road updates, and faith-based content have above-average engagement.
• Timing and cadence: Best engagement windows are weekday evenings (6–10 p.m.), late night for student audiences (10 p.m.–1 a.m.), and weekend mornings for family and faith communities.
• Cross-posting: Creators and businesses often repurpose the same vertical video across TikTok, Reels, and Shorts; link-in-bio and QR codes are common conversion paths due to mixed desktop/mobile access.

Key takeaways

• Reach: YouTube and Facebook deliver near-universal reach; Instagram is essential for 18–34; TikTok/Snapchat are must-haves for student reach.
• Creative: Prioritize authentic vertical video with location tags and campus or community hooks; pair with Facebook groups/Events for distribution.
• Media mix: For full-county coverage, anchor on Facebook + YouTube, add Instagram for 18–34, and layer TikTok/Snapchat for campus-heavy goals.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (most recent), Pew Research Center 2024 Social Media Use, and modeled local adjustments for Pike County’s age profile and rural-Southeast usage patterns.