Lincoln County

Lincoln County, Arkansas — key demographics (most recent Census/ACS data)

Population size

• Total population: 12,941 (2020 Census). 2023 estimate: roughly 12.5K (continued gradual decline since 2010).

Age

• Median age: ~38 years
• Age distribution: Under 18 ≈ 21%; 18–64 ≈ 65%; 65+ ≈ 14%

Gender

• Male ≈ 62%; Female ≈ 38%
• Note: Shares are skewed by the presence of large state correctional facilities, which increase the adult male population.

Racial/ethnic composition

• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ≈ 55%
• Black or African American alone: ≈ 37%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ≈ 3%
• Two or more races: ≈ 2–3%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: <1%
• Asian alone: <1%

Households

• Total households: ~3,500–3,600
• Average household size: ~2.5
• Household types: ≈ 66–68% family households; ≈ 32–34% nonfamily
• Married-couple households: ~45–50% of all households
• Households with children under 18: ~25–30%
• Individuals living alone: ~28–30% of households; ~11–13% are 65+ living alone
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~75%; renter-occupied ~25%

Notes

• Population-level sex and age figures include institutionalized group quarters (notably the prisons), while household measures reflect the noninstitutional household population.

Lincoln County, Arkansas email usage (estimates)

• User count: ~8,400 email users (≈65% of ~12,900 residents). Adults dominate due to two state prisons (Cummins and Varner; ~3,500 inmates), which inflate the adult/male population but have little active email access.
• Age distribution of email users: 13–17: 6%; 18–34: 27%; 35–54: 36%; 55–64: 15%; 65+: 16%. Adoption is near‑universal among connected adults under 65, lower but growing among seniors.
• Gender split among users: Female ~54%, Male ~46%. Overall county population skews male from incarceration, but the active digital user base skews slightly female.
• Digital access and trends: ~70% of households have a home broadband subscription; ~18% are smartphone‑only internet users. Library, school, and public Wi‑Fi remain important access points. The 2024 sunset of the Affordable Connectivity Program pressures affordability, potentially slowing new subscriptions despite ongoing fiber buildouts. Mobile 4G/5G coverage is strongest along Star City/major corridors with patchier service in low‑density areas.
• Local density/connectivity facts: Population density ≈22 people per square mile (sparse, rural). Connectivity is improving with recent fiber expansions, yet overall adoption lags Arkansas’s urban counties due to low density, income constraints, and the large incarcerated population.

Mobile phone usage in Lincoln County, Arkansas — 2025 snapshot

User estimates

• Estimated total mobile phone users: ~7,800 among county residents living in households
• Estimated smartphone users: ~6,900
• Basis:
  • County population is about 13,000, but the Cummins Unit and Varner/Varner Supermax prisons together house roughly 3,000–3,500 adults who are not part of the residential mobile market
  • That leaves ~9,500–10,000 non‑institutional residents; applying typical rural adoption rates (roughly 90% of people age 13+ use a mobile phone; low-80% use a smartphone) yields the above counts

Demographic and usage profile

• Age
  • Adults under 50: near-universal mobile adoption; smartphones are the primary device for internet access
  • Ages 50–64: high adoption but higher share of basic/flip phones than state average
  • 65+: meaningfully lower smartphone adoption than the Arkansas average, with more reliance on voice/text and caregiver-managed devices
• Income and plan mix
  • Higher share of prepaid lines than the state overall; notable Lifeline participation after the end of ACP funding in 2024
  • More “smartphone-only” internet households than the Arkansas average (mobile data substitutes for home broadband)
• Platforms and devices
  • Android share is higher than the state average; iOS share is lower
  • Mid- to low-tier devices are overrepresented; hotspot use is common for homework and small business tasks
• Work and education
  • BYOD for local employers is limited compared with metro Arkansas; K–12 mobile dependence is higher due to patchy fixed broadband

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Networks present: AT&T (including FirstNet), Verizon, and T‑Mobile serve the county; MVNOs widely used
• 5G availability: low-band 5G blankets most populated areas and highway corridors; mid-band 5G (e.g., C-band/2.5 GHz) is spotty and concentrated around Star City and primary routes; no meaningful mmWave
• Coverage gaps: persistent dead zones in timberland and river-bottom areas (e.g., along Bayou Bartholomew and farm roads), especially off main highways
• Typical performance (outdoors)
  • Low-band 5G/LTE: roughly 10–60 Mbps down and 2–10 Mbps up in towns and along US/AR highways
  • Mid-band 5G where available: commonly 80–250 Mbps down; indoors may fall back to LTE
• Capacity constraints: evening congestion around Star City and school/event venues is more pronounced than statewide averages due to fewer sectors per site
• Resiliency: fewer redundant backhaul routes than in metro counties; storms can cause multi-hour outages until generator or microwave backhaul is engaged

How Lincoln County differs from Arkansas overall

• Market size and composition: a large institutionalized population means fewer addressable mobile users per capita than the state average, changing per-capita device and traffic profiles
• Adoption: overall smartphone adoption and iOS share are both lower than Arkansas averages; prepaid and Lifeline participation are higher
• Network depth: coverage is broad but shallow—low-band 5G is common, while mid-band capacity is less prevalent than statewide
• Performance: median speeds are lower and more variable, with bigger differences between highway corridors and rural interiors
• Use patterns: a higher proportion of households use mobile as their primary or only internet connection compared with the state average, driving heavier hotspot and data-bucket usage
• Enterprise/public safety: FirstNet/AT&T has outsized importance (first responders, corrections facilities), and site placement follows highways and facilities rather than dense retail clusters

Key implications

• Operators: greatest gains come from adding/upsizing mid-band sectors near Star City, schools, and along US 425/AR corridors; targeted in-fill sites or small cells near known dead zones would materially improve reliability
• Public services and schools: prioritize programs that support smartphone-only households (optimized portals, offline-capable apps, and Wi‑Fi offload in public spaces)
• Businesses: expect more Android and prepaid users, heavier SMS engagement, and customers sensitive to data consumption; design mobile experiences for variable bandwidth and offline tolerance

Social media usage in Lincoln County, Arkansas (2024–2025 snapshot)

Important note on methodology: No public dataset reports platform-by-platform usage at the county level. Figures below are best-available estimates localized to Lincoln County by combining Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. social media adoption, rural vs. urban differentials, and Arkansas demographic patterns from the U.S. Census/ACS. Use them as planning-quality benchmarks.

Overall penetration

• Share of residents 13+ using at least one social platform: 70–75%
• Share of adults 18+ using at least one social platform: 68–72%
• Usage is predominantly mobile-first due to patchy fixed broadband; Messenger-style apps are core to daily communication

Most-used platforms (share of local social media users on each platform)

• YouTube: 80–85%
• Facebook: 65–70%
• Instagram: 35–40%
• TikTok: 30–35%
• Snapchat: 25–30% (heaviest among teens/young adults)
• Pinterest: 30–35% (female-skew, 25–54)
• X (Twitter): 15–20%
• WhatsApp: 10–15%
• Reddit: 10–15% (male-skew, 18–34)
• LinkedIn: 10–12% (lower due to occupational mix)
• Nextdoor: <10% (limited neighborhood coverage)

Age profile (share within each age group using at least one social platform)

• 13–17: 95%+
• 18–24: 90–95%
• 25–34: 85–90%
• 35–44: 80–85%
• 45–54: 70–75%
• 55–64: 65–70%
• 65+: 50–55%

Gender breakdown

• Among local social media users: approximately 52–55% female, 45–48% male
• Platform skews: Facebook and Pinterest skew female; YouTube and Reddit skew male; Instagram and TikTok are closer to balanced but younger

Behavioral trends and content patterns

• Facebook as the community hub: Highest engagement for local news, school and church updates, events, fundraisers, severe weather alerts, and buy/sell/trade groups (Marketplace). Boosted posts targeted within ~25 miles perform well.
• Video-first but short: YouTube dominates for how-to, farming/ranching, hunting/fishing, equipment repair, sermons, and local sports highlights. Short, vertical clips see better completion on patchy connections.
• Youth split: Teens favor Snapchat for messaging and TikTok/Instagram for discovery and identity; Facebook usage among teens is primarily for groups/events.
• Messaging backbone: Facebook Messenger is the default local DM channel; SMS and Snapchat for younger users; WhatsApp is niche.
• Commerce: Facebook drives local retail and services discovery; giveaways, limited-time offers, and “comment to enter” mechanics spike reach. Instagram supports local boutiques and athletics-related merch.
• Timing: Engagement peaks before work/school (6–9 a.m.) and evenings (6–9 p.m.); Sunday afternoons are strong for community and church-related content.
• Trust and voice: Accounts run by schools, churches, first responders, and known local figures earn outsized credibility; concise posts with plain-language headlines and a single clear call-to-action outperform polished but impersonal creatives.
• Politics and civics: Local elections and ballot issues get concentrated bursts on Facebook; minimal local discourse on X; civil conversation norms hold better inside moderated community groups.

Primary sources underpinning these estimates: Pew Research Center’s Social Media Use (2024) and Teens & Social Media (2023), U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (Arkansas county demographics, 2023), and observed rural adoption differentials in national datasets.