Clay County

Population

• 2020 Census: ~13,300
• 2023 estimate: ~13,000 (slight decline since 2020)

Age

• Median age: ~42 years
• Under 18: ~23%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (may not sum to 100% due to rounding; Hispanic can be any race)

• White: ~96%
• Black or African American: ~0.5–1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.2–0.3%
• Asian: ~0.2%
• Two or more races: ~2–3%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~2%

Households

• Total households: ~5,300–5,500
• Persons per household: ~2.4
• Family households: ~66%
• Married-couple families: ~49%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~75–78%

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

Clay County, IL — snapshot of email usage (estimates)

• Estimated email users: 9,000–11,000 residents. Based on ~13.3k population and national adult email adoption (≈88–94%) applied to local age mix; some teens included.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–17: ~5–7%
  • 18–34: ~25–28%
  • 35–64: ~50–55%
  • 65+: ~15–20% Adoption is highest among 18–64, lower but substantial among seniors.
• Gender split: Near parity; county population is roughly 51% female/49% male, and email use shows minimal gender gap (≈±1–2 percentage points).
• Digital access trends:
  • About low‑70s% of households subscribe to broadband; computer/smartphone access in the high‑80s% (ACS-style indicators for rural Illinois).
  • Smartphone‑only internet is notably higher than the state average; libraries/schools remain important access points.
  • Gradual gains since 2018, with persistent gaps for seniors and lower‑income rural households.
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • ~13.3k residents across ~470 sq mi ≈ 28–30 people per sq mi (sparse, rural).
  • Wired high‑speed options thin outside towns; fixed wireless and satellite fill coverage gaps.

Notes: Figures synthesize 2020 Census/ACS county measures with national email adoption benchmarks (e.g., Pew) to produce county‑level estimates.

Clay County, Illinois: mobile phone usage snapshot (what’s distinctive vs. Illinois overall)

Population baseline

• Residents: about 13,000 (aging, largely rural; county seat: Flora).
• Rural age mix skews older than the state, with more 55+ and fewer 18–34 than Illinois overall.

User estimates

• Total mobile phone users (any mobile): 10,500–11,000 people (roughly 80–85% of residents). Statewide is closer to the high-80s to 90% among adults.
• Smartphone users: 8,800–9,300 people (about 68–72% of all residents; among adults, roughly 75–82%). Illinois statewide adult smartphone penetration is notably higher (low- to mid‑80s).
• Youth (13–17): roughly 600–700 smartphone users (high adoption), but a smaller youth share overall than the state, which lowers the county’s total smartphone share.
• Mobile‑only internet households: meaningfully higher than the state average due to gaps in affordable wired options; common use of phone hotspots for home internet.

Demographic patterns

• Age
  • 18–34: near‑urban adoption levels; heavy app, video, and social use.
  • 35–64: high mobile ownership, pragmatic usage (work coordination, weather, ag tools).
  • 65+: sizable segment using basic phones or smartphones mainly for calling/texting; smartphone adoption lags the state by a wide margin.
• Income and plans
  • Higher prepaid and MVNO use (e.g., Straight Talk, Consumer Cellular) than statewide, reflecting cost sensitivity and credit constraints.
  • More line‑sharing family plans to manage costs and coverage diversity (e.g., one Verizon line plus a T‑Mobile line).
• Platforms and apps
  • Android share likely majority (about 55–65%) versus iOS leading in Illinois overall.
  • Heavier reliance on Facebook, Messenger, and SMS; less use of delivery/ride‑hail apps than urban Illinois.
• Work/use cases
  • Agriculture, trades, and logistics: frequent use of weather, mapping, messaging, and equipment apps; hotspotting tablets/laptops in the field.
  • Telehealth via mobile is common due to limited local specialty care and uneven fixed broadband.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Macro coverage
  • Verizon: generally the most reliable rural blanket coverage; strong along US‑50 and near towns.
  • AT&T: solid in towns and along main corridors; participates in FirstNet for public safety.
  • T‑Mobile: good in Flora/Louisville and along US‑50; patchier in outlying townships.
• 5G
  • Low‑band 5G present around population centers and highways; mid‑band/capacity 5G is limited versus metro Illinois. Many areas still behave like LTE for real‑world speeds.
• Capacity and tower density
  • Fewer sites per square mile than state average; more macro towers, few small cells; some towers rely on microwave backhaul, constraining peak‑hour throughput.
  • Notable dead or weak zones in low‑lying/wooded areas and on secondary county roads away from US‑50.
• Indoor experience
  • More dependence on Wi‑Fi calling and signal boosters in farmhouses/metal buildings.
• Wired and fixed‑wireless context (impacts mobile usage)
  • Wabash Communications/Telephone Cooperative has been expanding fiber-to-the-home in and around Louisville/Flora and selected rural routes; footprint is growing but not universal.
  • Legacy DSL and limited cable persist in some areas; several fixed‑wireless ISPs serve line‑of‑sight locations.
  • Satellite (including Starlink) and cellular home internet fill gaps; usage caps and variable performance push residents to rely on mobile data more than the Illinois average.

How Clay County differs from Illinois overall

• Lower smartphone penetration and more basic‑phone users, driven by an older population and income constraints.
• Higher share of Android, prepaid/MVNO, and mobile‑only internet households.
• Coverage leadership by Verizon/AT&T is more pronounced; T‑Mobile’s gains are visible in towns but not as uniform countywide.
• 5G availability exists but delivers fewer mid‑band capacity benefits than in metro Illinois; day‑to‑day experience often mirrors LTE.
• Greater reliance on hotspots/Wi‑Fi calling and on practical apps (weather, ag, navigation) over urban convenience services.

Notes on methodology and confidence

• Figures are modeled from county population/age mix and national/rural adoption benchmarks (e.g., Pew Research) adjusted for local infrastructure realities; use ranges to reflect uncertainty. For project planning, verify live carrier maps, FCC Broadband Data Collection maps, and local providers (e.g., Wabash Communications) for current buildouts and tower locations.

Clay County, IL social media snapshot (modeled 2025)

Note: County‑level platform stats aren’t published. Figures below are best‑available estimates using Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. usage benchmarks, adjusted for Clay County’s older/rural profile and Illinois small‑county norms.

Headline user stats

• Population context: ~13K residents; adults ~10–11K.
• Adults using at least one social platform: 65–75% ≈ 7,000–8,000 people.
• Gender among users: roughly balanced, ~51–53% women, ~47–49% men.
• Age mix among adult users (est. share of the social‑media user base):
  • 18–29: 18–22%
  • 30–49: 34–38% (largest cohort)
  • 50–64: 25–30%
  • 65+: 15–20%
• Teens (13–17): very high usage; majority active daily on Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube.

Most‑used platforms (estimated share of adults in Clay County using)

• YouTube: 65–75%
• Facebook: 60–70%
• Instagram: 25–35%
• TikTok: 20–30%
• Snapchat: 18–28% (heavy among under‑30)
• Pinterest: 20–30% (skews female)
• X (Twitter): 10–15%
• LinkedIn: 10–15% (concentrated in educators/healthcare/public sector)
• Reddit: 8–12%
• WhatsApp: 10–15% (family/faith/community clusters)
• Nextdoor: 2–5% (Facebook Groups fill this role locally)

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, school sports, church updates, emergency/weather alerts, buy/sell/trade groups, and Facebook Marketplace drive daily check‑ins. Events are primarily coordinated via Facebook Events and Groups.
• Video is rising: YouTube for how‑to/DIY, farming, hunting/outdoors; short‑form (Reels/TikTok) among younger adults for entertainment and local highlights.
• Messaging patterns: Facebook Messenger dominates among adults; Snapchat is the default messenger for teens/college‑age.
• Content that performs: local faces and practical info (school schedules, road closures, obituaries, fundraisers), photo galleries from games and fairs, giveaways, and short vertical clips. Posts with clear utility or community relevance outperform polished brand content.
• Timing: engagement peaks evenings (6–9 pm) and weekends; midday weekdays softer except during weather events or school announcements.
• Commerce and jobs: Marketplace and local buy/sell groups are primary for classifieds; small businesses rely on boosted Facebook posts; job postings circulate in Facebook Groups more than LinkedIn.
• Trust dynamics: users prioritize information from known local institutions (schools, county EMA, sheriff’s office, local radio), and share/reshare behavior amplifies word‑of‑mouth.
• Generational split: 50+ stays on Facebook; under‑35 splits time across Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, with cross‑posting to Facebook for reach.