Scott County

Scott County, Arkansas — key demographics

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates)

Population size

• Total population: 9,836 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~41 years (ACS 2019–2023)
• Age distribution: under 18 ≈ 25%; 18–64 ≈ 55%; 65+ ≈ 20% (ACS 2019–2023)

Gender

• Female: ≈ 49%
• Male: ≈ 51% (ACS 2019–2023)

Racial/ethnic composition (shares of total population)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~76–78%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~11%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1–2%
• Black or African American: ~1%
• Asian, NH/PI, some other race: each ≤1% (ACS 2019–2023)

Households and housing

• Households: ~3,650–3,800 (2020–ACS 2019–2023)
• Average household size: ~2.6–2.7
• Family households: ~68–70%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~75–77%
• Median household income: ~$47k–$49k
• Poverty rate: ~18–20% (ACS 2019–2023)

Notable insight

• Population decline from 2010 to 2020 of roughly 12% (from ~11.2k to 9.8k), consistent with rural outmigration patterns.

Scott County, Arkansas context

• Population: 10,518 (2020); area ≈892 sq mi; density ≈11.8 people/sq mi (very rural, challenging last‑mile economics).

Email usage (estimated)

• Users: ≈7,100 residents use email regularly.
• Age distribution of users: 18–34: ~24%; 35–54: ~34%; 55–64: ~19%; 65+: ~23% (reflects high adoption across adults with modest drop among seniors).
• Gender split: ~50% female, ~50% male (mirrors county demographics).

Digital access and connectivity

• Household tech access (ACS 2018–2022): ~86% of households have a computer (incl. smartphones); ~69% have a broadband subscription; ~19% have no home internet; ~10% are cellular‑data‑only.
• Trends: Broadband subscription and smartphone penetration continue to rise, but a meaningful minority remains offline or mobile‑only, limiting reliable email access. Low population density and mountainous/forested terrain contribute to patchy fixed broadband and slower speeds compared with urban Arkansas.
• Local density/connectivity facts: With fewer than 12 residents per square mile, service providers face high per‑premise build costs; public Wi‑Fi (schools, libraries, municipal buildings) and mobile networks play outsized roles in connectivity and email access.

Below is a decision-ready brief on mobile phone usage in Scott County, Arkansas, emphasizing how local patterns diverge from statewide trends. Because no official source directly publishes “smartphone ownership by county” as a single statistic, county-level insights rely on the best-available public indicators: American Community Survey (ACS) “telephone service available” and “internet subscription by type” (including cellular data plans), FCC mobile/broadband infrastructure filings, and rural adoption patterns from Pew and NTIA. Where exact county figures are not released, I note the direction and magnitude of difference versus Arkansas overall based on those sources and rural comparators.

Executive view

• Smartphone adoption: Lower than the Arkansas average, but high in absolute terms. Rural counties of similar size and income profile typically show adult smartphone adoption in the low- to mid-80% range, several points below statewide.
• Smartphone-only internet users: Higher share than Arkansas overall. Reliance on cellular data as the primary or only home internet connection is elevated due to patchy fixed broadband and cost constraints.
• Coverage and capacity: Macro coverage from national carriers reaches population centers (Waldron and primary corridors) but with more dead zones, weaker indoor signal, and slower average throughput than the state average, especially across the Ouachita terrain.
• Affordability programs matter more: Enrollment in ACP-era subsidies and Lifeline-style offerings had outsized local impact, and the wind-down of ACP is more likely to increase smartphone-only dependence and data-constrained use in the county than statewide.

User estimates and usage patterns

• Adult smartphone ownership: Below the state benchmark by several percentage points. Rural Arkansas counties with similar demographics typically track in the 80–85% range vs higher statewide.
• Smartphone-only households: Above the Arkansas average. Rural counties with lower wired broadband availability routinely show materially higher smartphone-only rates, reflecting cellular data plans substituting for home internet.
• Prepaid vs postpaid mix: Skews more prepaid than the state average, consistent with lower median income and credit constraints typical of small, rural counties.
• Voice/text reliability: Acceptable on primary corridors; call quality and consistency degrade in hollows and forested areas away from highways, diverging from the more uniform statewide experience.
• App/data usage: Higher sensitivity to data caps and throttling than statewide, with heavier reliance on offline modes, Wi‑Fi offload when available (schools, libraries, municipal buildings), and messaging apps optimized for low bandwidth.

Demographic and socioeconomic factors shaping mobile use

• Age structure: Older median age than Arkansas overall, which typically softens top-end smartphone adoption and 5G device penetration compared with state averages.
• Income and poverty: Lower household income and higher poverty rates than the statewide profile, correlating with greater prepaid adoption, slower device replacement cycles, and higher dependence on a single smartphone per household.
• Education and employment mix: Larger shares in agriculture, manufacturing, and outdoor work amplify the need for coverage along rural routes but reduce the utility of high-capacity urban small-cell deployments common in metro Arkansas.
• Race/ethnicity: A predominantly White, rural county with a meaningful Hispanic community centered around local industry; language and remittance use patterns support above-average reliance on messaging apps, VoIP, and cross-border fintech apps compared with statewide rural peers.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Terrain and density: The Ouachita Mountains and low population density increase both the cost and difficulty of dense cell-site placement relative to the state as a whole, producing wider spacing between macro towers and fewer mid-band/5G upgrades off the main corridors.
• Macro sites and backhaul: Fewer total macro sites per square mile than statewide; microwave backhaul remains common on secondary sites, limiting peak speeds and capacity compared with fiber-fed sites more prevalent in urban Arkansas.
• Technology mix: LTE is the coverage workhorse; 5G low-band is present along primary corridors but with smaller mid-band footprints than the state average, and little to no mmWave outside specific venues.
• Indoor coverage: More reliance on Wi‑Fi calling and signal boosters in metal-roofed homes and commercial buildings; indoor experience trails the statewide norm.
• Fixed-broadband substitutes: Where cable or fiber is limited, households lean on smartphone hotspots and fixed wireless access (FWA). FWA availability has expanded but remains spottier than statewide, especially off the highway grid.

How Scott County differs most from Arkansas overall

• Higher dependence on smartphones as a primary/only internet on-ramp due to limited, inconsistent, or costly wired options.
• More prepaid plans, slower device turnover, and tighter data budgets, increasing sensitivity to promotions and deprioritization.
• Wider 4G reliance and smaller mid-band 5G footprint; more dead zones and lower indoor signal strength away from town centers.
• Greater marginal impact from subsidy shifts (e.g., ACP), meaning policy or carrier pricing changes move user behavior more here than in metro Arkansas.

Implications

• Carriers: Capacity upgrades on key corridors, fiber backhaul to existing macros, and targeted small cells in Waldron and school/health hubs would yield outsized benefits.
• Public sector: Last‑mile fiber builds and middle‑mile enhancements will directly reduce smartphone-only dependence; continuing device and hotspot programs through schools and libraries will maintain connectivity for students and seniors.
• Community orgs: Digital literacy, bilingual outreach, and Wi‑Fi access points in civic spaces continue to offset cost and coverage gaps that are more pronounced locally than statewide.

Notes on measurement

• County-level “mobile phone usage” is inferred from ACS telephone availability, internet subscription types (including cellular), FCC coverage/infrastructure filings, and rural adoption patterns; Arkansas does not publish a single official smartphone-ownership statistic by county.

Scott County, Arkansas social media snapshot (modeled local estimates, 2025)

Population baseline

• Total population: ~9,800 (U.S. Census, 2020). Residents 13+ ≈ 8,300.
• Residents 13+ using at least one social platform monthly: ~72% (≈6,000).
• YouTube users (monthly) among 13+: ~84% (≈7,000).

Most‑used platforms (share of residents 13+)

• YouTube: 84%
• Facebook: 64%
• Instagram: 38%
• TikTok: 33%
• Snapchat: 27%
• Pinterest: 26%
• X (Twitter): 13%
• LinkedIn: 9%
• Reddit: 8%
• Nextdoor: <5%

Age‑group profile (share within each age band using the platform monthly)

• Teens (13–17): YouTube 95%, TikTok 70%, Snapchat 63%, Instagram 60%, Facebook 30%
• 18–29: YouTube 96%, Instagram 78%, TikTok 64%, Snapchat 59%, Facebook 67%
• 30–49: YouTube 90%, Facebook 78%, Instagram 50%, TikTok 38%, Snapchat 27%, Pinterest 35%
• 50–64: YouTube 82%, Facebook 72%, Instagram 28%, TikTok 18%, Pinterest 30%
• 65+: YouTube 58%, Facebook 55%, Instagram 15%, TikTok 8%, Pinterest 20%

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

• Overall social users: ~52% female, 48% male
• Facebook: 56–58% female
• Instagram: 55–60% female
• Pinterest: ~70% female
• TikTok: ~52% female
• YouTube: 55–60% male
• X (Twitter): 60–65% male
• Reddit: 65–70% male

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural Arkansas communities and reflected locally

• Community-first on Facebook: heavy use of local groups, school/athletics updates, church and civic announcements, and Facebook Marketplace for buy/sell/trade.
• Messaging is central: Facebook Messenger for families; Snapchat for teens/young adults; SMS still common for older residents.
• Video-led habits: YouTube for how-to, farming/DIY, hunting/outdoors, small-engine repair, gospel and country music; short-form TikTok for entertainment and local humor.
• News discovery: Local news and emergency updates primarily through Facebook pages and shares; limited reliance on X except among news-followers.
• Shopping and services: Facebook Marketplace and local business pages drive most social commerce; Instagram Shops/TikTok Shop used mainly by under‑35.
• Mobile‑first access: High share of viewing on smartphones due to rural broadband constraints; evening peaks (6–9 pm) and weekend spikes.
• Content preferences: Practical, event-based, and family-oriented content outperforms polished brand creative; posts with faces, local landmarks, and clear calls to action get higher engagement.
• Trust and word-of-mouth: Recommendations in local groups strongly influence service choices (home repair, auto, outdoor services).

Notes on methodology and sources

• Figures are modeled local estimates based on Scott County’s 2020 Census population/age structure and U.S. platform adoption rates from Pew Research Center (2023–2024) and other widely cited industry datasets. Platform penetration skews are adjusted for rural demographics typical of western Arkansas.