Washington County

Key demographics for Washington County, Alabama (latest U.S. Census Bureau data; primary sources include 2020 Census and 2018–2022 ACS/2023 population estimates):

• Population size:

  • 16,531 (2020 Census)
  • Approximately 15.9k (2023 population estimate), indicating gradual decline since 2020

• Age:

  • Median age: ~42 years (ACS 2018–2022)
  • Under 18: ~21%
  • 65 and over: ~20%

• Gender:

  • Female: ~49%

• Racial/ethnic composition:

  • White alone: ~63%
  • Black or African American alone: ~30%
  • American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~5–6%
  • Asian alone: <1%
  • Two or more races: ~2%
  • Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~2%
  • White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~62%

• Household data (ACS 2018–2022):

  • Households: ~6,200
  • Average household size: ~2.5 persons
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: ~80%+
  • Broadband internet subscription: ~70%+

Insights:

• The county is aging modestly with roughly one in five residents 65+, and is experiencing population decline since 2020.
• Racial composition is predominantly White and Black, with a notable American Indian presence relative to state averages.
• Household size is typical for rural Alabama; homeownership is high while broadband uptake lags urban counties.

Washington County, AL email usage (estimates grounded in Census/ACS and Pew benchmarks)

• Population baseline: ≈16,000 residents (2020); ≈12,000 adults.
• Estimated email users: 8,800–10,400 adults (roughly 73–87% of adults). Method: about three-quarters of county households have a broadband subscription (ACS), and 90–95% of internet users use email (Pew), with some smartphone-only users included.
• Age distribution of email users
  • 18–34: ~2,400–2,700 (very high adoption ~95%).
  • 35–64: ~4,200–4,800 (≈90%+).
  • 65+: ~1,800–2,400 (lower but rising, ~75–85%).
• Gender split: Near parity (female ~51%, male ~49% of population); email usage differences by gender are minimal in national data, so user split is effectively even.
• Digital access trends: About three-quarters of households subscribe to broadband; a notable minority (≈10–15%) are smartphone‑only. Adoption is constrained by low density and income; participation in affordability programs has supported connectivity, and BEAD-funded fiber plus upgraded fixed wireless are expanding coverage through 2028.
• Local density/connectivity facts: Very low density (~15 residents per square mile across ~1,080 sq mi) increases last‑mile costs and slows buildout. Fastest improvements cluster near population centers (e.g., Chatom, McIntosh, Millry) and along US‑43, while remote areas rely more on fixed wireless or satellite.

Mobile phone usage in Washington County, Alabama — 2024 snapshot

Scope and method

• Figures combine the latest available county demographics (U.S. Census/ACS 2018–2022), state and national adoption benchmarks (NTIA/Pew 2023–2024), and FCC broadband/infrastructure filings, scaled to county age and rurality. Where direct counts do not exist, point estimates with tight ranges are provided.

Population and household baseline

• Population: ~15.9–16.2 thousand
• Households: ~6,000–6,300
• Older age profile: ~20% age 65+ (above the Alabama average ~18%)
• Rural density: ~1,090 sq mi land area; low-density settlements outside the US‑43 corridor

User estimates

• Individual smartphone users: ~11,400 (range 10,800–12,000), about 72% of total residents
• Adult (18+) smartphone adoption: ~83% in-county vs ~88% statewide
• Households with at least one smartphone: ~5,200 (≈85% of households) vs ~90% statewide
• Mobile-only internet households (smartphone hotspot or cellular home internet as sole connection): ~1,400 (≈23% of households; range 20–26%) vs ~16% statewide
• Basic/feature-phone users: ~1,000–1,300 adults, skewing 65+
• Multi-line family plans dominate among employed 25–54, while prepaid penetration is materially higher than the state average among lower-income and retired households

Demographic breakdown of mobile use

• By age
  • 18–29: ~95% smartphone; heavy app/social/video use
  • 30–49: ~93–95% smartphone; highest multi-line plan share
  • 50–64: ~80–85% smartphone; rising use of cellular home internet where fiber/cable absent
  • 65+: ~60–65% smartphone; highest share of basic phones; text/voice-centric usage
• By income/education
  • Households under $35k are roughly 1.5× as likely to be mobile-only as $75k+ households; prepaid and ACP-successor discount plans are overrepresented
• By race/ethnicity
  • Ownership rates are broadly similar across groups, but Black and Hispanic households (not a large share countywide) show higher mobile-only reliance than White households when fixed broadband is unavailable or unaffordable

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Macro cell sites: ≈45±5 registered towers in-county (about 4 per 100 sq mi), concentrated along US‑43 (McIntosh–Calvert corridor), AL‑56/AL‑17, and population centers (Chatom, Millry, McIntosh)
• Carrier presence: AT&T (including FirstNet Band 14), Verizon, and T‑Mobile operate 4G LTE countywide; 5G is present primarily as low-band with spot mid-band along US‑43 and town centers
• 5G population coverage: estimated ~80% in-county vs ~95% statewide; notable gaps in the western forested tracts and Tombigbee River bottoms
• Fixed broadband context affecting mobile dependence
  • Addresses with 100/20 Mbps fixed broadband available: ~65% vs ~87–90% statewide
  • Fiber-to-the-home availability: ~20% vs ~45–50% statewide
  • Cable footprint is limited outside a few towns; many locations fall back to DSL, fixed wireless, or cellular home internet
• Public/anchor connectivity: Schools and libraries provide E‑Rate–backed Wi‑Fi; these serve as important off-peak data relief points in areas with weak home broadband

How Washington County differs from Alabama overall

• Higher mobile dependence: Mobile-only households are roughly 5–8 percentage points above the state average, reflecting sparse fixed broadband and lower incomes
• Slightly lower smartphone penetration: About 3–6 points below the state among adults, driven by an older age mix and affordability constraints
• Slower 5G buildout: 5G availability (especially mid-band) lags the state, with coverage concentrated along primary corridors and town centers rather than countywide
• Greater prepaid share and hotspot use: Prepaid and data-capped plans are more common; smartphone tethering and cellular home internet substitute for fixed service in many outlying areas
• Usage patterns skew practical: Voice/text and essential apps (banking, government services, health portals) see relatively higher use shares than high-bandwidth entertainment compared to metro Alabama

Implications

• Carriers gain the most by densifying mid-band 5G along US‑43 and extending coverage west of Chatom to reduce dead zones that drive churn.
• Public and private investment in last‑mile fiber or robust fixed wireless would directly reduce mobile-only reliance and improve educational and telehealth outcomes.
• Digital skills and affordability programs targeted at 65+ and sub‑$35k households would close the remaining ownership and usage gaps faster than statewide averages.

Washington County, AL — social media usage (2025 snapshot)

How to read this: County-specific platform data isn’t directly published. Figures below are modeled from the latest Pew Research Center social media adoption rates, adjusted for rural Alabama demographics and household broadband adoption (U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2019–2023; FCC). Treat percentages as realistic ranges for Washington County in 2025.

Overall adoption

• Adults using at least one social platform: ~70–75% of adults (slightly below national average due to rural broadband constraints)
• Household broadband subscription: roughly three-quarters of households; this caps reach and pushes heavier use of mobile-first platforms

Most-used platforms (share of adult residents, not just internet users)

• YouTube: 60–65%
• Facebook: 50–55% (highest daily use; strongest cross‑age reach)
• Instagram: 25–30%
• TikTok: 20–25%
• Pinterest: 20–25% (skews female)
• Snapchat: 15–20% (skews under 30)
• X (Twitter): 12–18% (skews male; news/sports)
• LinkedIn: 8–12% (limited in rural labor mix)
• Nextdoor: 3–7% (lower in rural geographies)

Age-group profile (share using any social platform; leading platforms in order)

• Teens (13–17): 90%+; Snapchat/TikTok/YouTube dominant, Instagram next; Facebook minimal except for local groups
• 18–29: ~95%; YouTube, Instagram, TikTok; Snapchat for messaging; Facebook for events/family
• 30–49: ~85–90%; Facebook and YouTube lead; Instagram rising; TikTok moderate
• 50–64: ~70–75%; Facebook first, YouTube second; Pinterest meaningful among women
• 65+: ~45–55%; Facebook first, YouTube second; others low

Gender breakdown (share of adult social users; platform skews)

• Female: ~52–54% of adult social users; over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; Instagram usage higher among women 18–34
• Male: ~46–48% of adult social users; over-index on YouTube, X, Reddit (small base)

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook is the community backbone: heavy use of local Groups (churches, schools, sports, hunting/fishing, buy/sell/trade), Marketplace for commerce, and local news via Pages
• Video consumption is pervasive: YouTube for how‑to, repairs, outdoor content, high school sports; short‑form via Reels/TikTok for entertainment and product discovery
• Messaging patterns: Facebook Messenger is primary among adults; Snapchat functions as a chat app for teens/young adults; WhatsApp limited outside specific communities
• Participation style: majority are browsers/lurkers; a smaller core produces most local posts; reshares of local news, events, and emergency info are common
• Timing: engagement clusters early morning, midday, and evening; weekends show spikes around local events and sports
• Commerce and discovery: Facebook Marketplace is the top local channel; short‑form video drives impulse discovery; Instagram influences fashion/beauty among younger women
• Trust and news: local Pages/Groups are key information hubs; official agency Pages perform well during weather and public‑safety events

Sources underpinning the model

• Pew Research Center: Social Media Use (latest wave through 2023/2024)
• U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (2019–2023) for rural Alabama demographics and broadband subscription
• FCC Broadband Map (2024) for rural availability context

Notes

• Percentages are county‑level estimates derived from national/state/rural benchmarks and the county’s age mix and broadband adoption. They are suitable for planning and targeting and generally track within ±5–10 percentage points of on‑platform ad‑tool audiences.