Edgar County

Here’s a concise demographic snapshot of Edgar County, Illinois.

Population size

• Total population: 16,866 (2020 Census)
• Recent estimate: ~16.2k (2023 population estimate)

Age

• Median age: ~45 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 65 and over: ~23%

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Race and ethnicity

• White alone: ~94–95%
• Black or African American alone: ~1–2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~0–1%
• Asian alone: ~0–1%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~2–3%

Households

• Total households: ~7,200–7,300
• Average household size: ~2.3
• Family households: ~62%
• Married-couple households: ~49–50%
• Nonfamily households: ~38%
• Households with children under 18: ~25%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; latest available American Community Survey 5-year estimates).

Here’s a practical estimate for Edgar County, IL:

• Estimated email users: ~13,000 (of ~16.9K residents), based on adult/teen population share and typical U.S. email adoption (high among adults, slightly lower among teens).
• Age distribution of email users (approx.):
  • 18–34: 24%
  • 35–54: 32%
  • 55–64: 17%
  • 65+: 27%
• Gender split among users: roughly even, about 51% female / 49% male.
• Digital access trends:
  • Household broadband subscription is likely in the 75–80% range (rural Illinois profile), with a notable minority relying on smartphone-only access (~10–15%).
  • Wired internet is concentrated in towns; fixed wireless and some satellite fill gaps in outlying farm areas.
  • Public institutions (library/schools) serve as important access points for those without home service.
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • Low population density (27 people per sq. mile) versus the Illinois average (230+/sq. mile) increases last‑mile costs and slows full fiber coverage; connectivity is strongest in Paris and other town centers, with sparser options in the countryside.

Notes: Figures are modeled from Census/ACS rural patterns and national email adoption benchmarks; exact county-specific email counts are not directly published.

Below is a compact, evidence-based picture of mobile phone usage in Edgar County, Illinois, with estimates tailored to local demographics and infrastructure, and with differences from statewide patterns called out.

Executive snapshot

• County profile: Rural, ~16.5–17k residents (2020 Census), older and lower-income than Illinois overall; population is dispersed outside the seat of Paris.
• Big picture: Near-universal cellphone access, but slightly lower smartphone adoption than Illinois; heavier reliance on mobile as a primary internet connection for some households due to patchy wired broadband outside town centers; 5G is present but more uneven than in metro Illinois.

User and adoption estimates (adults 18+ unless noted)

• Cellphone ownership (any type): 94–97% of adults. Rationale: national ownership is ~97%; rural and older skew pulls this down slightly relative to Illinois.
• Smartphone adoption: 82–88% of adults. Rationale: below Illinois’ ~90–92% because Edgar is older and more rural.
• Count of smartphone users: roughly 11–13k adults; including teens, total county smartphone users likely 12–14k.
• “Wireless-only (no landline)” households: about 60–70% of adults live in households without a landline. Rationale: national NHIS is ~70+%; rural/older mix in Edgar nudges that a bit lower than Illinois statewide.
• “Smartphone-only internet” users (no home broadband): estimated 20–25% of adults, above Illinois by several points, reflecting limited non-mobile options outside Paris and budget constraints.

Demographic patterns that shape usage

• Age: Share of 65+ is several points higher than the Illinois average. This depresses smartphone adoption (roughly 60–70% in 65+ vs ~90% among under-50s). Expect more basic/older devices and lower app intensity in the senior cohort.
• Income and education: Median household income and bachelor’s attainment are lower than the state average. This correlates with more prepaid plans, tighter data budgets, and a higher likelihood of using a phone as the primary internet device.
• Household dispersion: More single-detached homes on acreage and metal-roofed structures increase indoor coverage variability; boosters and Wi‑Fi calling see above-average use.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage footprint
  • 4G LTE: Broad county coverage from national carriers along main corridors; service thins at section-line roads and low-density areas.
  • 5G: Present in/around Paris and along primary routes; predominantly low-band with pockets of mid-band. Coverage is less contiguous than metro Illinois.
• Carriers: AT&T, T‑Mobile, Verizon are primary. Regional operator UScellular historically serves rural Illinois; roaming and spectrum transitions may affect experience at the margins.
• Site grid: A sparse macro-tower network typical of farm counties (multi-mile spacing); limited small-cell presence outside downtown Paris or school/health campuses.
• Backhaul: Fiber along main highways/utility routes; otherwise mixed fiber/microwave backhaul. Where microwave backhaul persists, peak-hour speeds and latency can degrade.
• Typical performance (field-verified ranges vary by carrier/segment)
  • LTE: ~5–40 Mbps down, 2–10 up; 40–80 ms latency.
  • 5G low-band: ~20–80 Mbps down.
  • 5G mid-band pockets (near town): ~100–300 Mbps down when signal is strong.
• Indoor reliability: Older farmhouses and metal buildings commonly need signal boosters; Wi‑Fi calling is an important workaround where broadband is available.

How Edgar County differs from Illinois overall

• Adoption
  • Slightly lower smartphone adoption due to older age mix; more basic/older phones in circulation.
  • Higher share of smartphone-only internet users, reflecting cost sensitivity and incomplete fiber/cable reach outside Paris.
• Network experience
  • 5G coverage is patchier and more low-band dependent than in Chicago-area and downstate metro counties; mid-band capacity zones are smaller and more intermittent.
  • Greater reliance on LTE fallback and more frequent indoor coverage gaps; boosters/Wi‑Fi calling used more often than statewide.
• Plan mix
  • Higher prepaid and budget-plan penetration; more conservative data usage patterns.
• Cross-border dynamics
  • Proximity to Indiana means occasional fringe roaming or carrier handoffs near the state line—an issue far less common in interior urban Illinois.

Trajectory (near-term outlook)

• As carriers densify mid-band 5G and state/federal programs (e.g., Connect Illinois/BEAD) extend fiber, smartphone-only reliance should taper in the next 2–4 years.
• Macro site additions or sector upgrades near unserved pockets would disproportionately improve indoor coverage in farmsteads and along county-line roads.

Data notes and method

• Estimates reflect national and Illinois patterns from sources such as Pew Research Center (smartphone adoption, smartphone-only internet), NHIS (wireless-only households), and ACS 5-year county demographics through 2023, adjusted for Edgar County’s rural, older, and lower-income profile.
• Exact tower counts, carrier footprints, and speeds vary by location and over time; consult current FCC coverage maps and carrier tools for address-level verification.

Edgar County, IL social media snapshot (estimates, 2025)

Baseline and user stats

• Population: ~16.5–17k residents; ~12.5–13.5k adults (18+).
• Overall social media users: ~9.5k–11.5k residents (about 58–70% of total; roughly 68–74% of adults). Based on rural U.S. adoption rates and age mix.

Age groups (share who use social media)

• Teens 13–17: ~90–95%
• 18–29: ~85–90%
• 30–49: ~78–85%
• 50–64: ~68–75%
• 65+: ~50–60%

Gender breakdown (among local users)

• Female: ~52–55% of users; relatively higher on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest.
• Male: ~45–48% of users; relatively higher on YouTube, Reddit, X.

Most-used platforms (estimated share of local adults using each at least monthly)

• YouTube: 70–80% (how-to, farm/DIY, local sports highlights)
• Facebook: 60–70% (older skew; Groups and Marketplace dominate)
• Instagram: 30–40% (under-40 skew; cross-posted with Facebook)
• TikTok: 25–35% (under-35 skew; short local clips rising)
• Snapchat: 20–30% (teens/20s; heavy messaging)
• Pinterest: 25–35% (female skew; recipes, crafts, home/farm projects)
• Messenger: common among Facebook users for transactions and coordination
• WhatsApp: 10–20% (family, small business)
• X (Twitter): 10–15% (news/sports watchers)
• Reddit: 10–15% (younger male skew)
• LinkedIn: 15–25% (professionals; smaller base)
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (less saturated vs metros)

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups are the hub for local news, school updates, church and civic events, 4-H/FFA, youth and high school sports, and buy/sell/trade.
• Marketplace-driven commerce: Strong response to listings posted evenings with clear photos; frequent interest in vehicles, tools, farm equipment, and household goods.
• Event spikes: County fair, festivals, parades, and big games drive short bursts of high reach; photo albums and short vertical videos outperform text-only posts.
• Messaging over public posts: Teens/20s favor Snapchat DMs; adults rely on Messenger to negotiate sales and coordinate services.
• Short-form video growth: TikTok and Reels consumption is rising; patchy coverage/data caps favor shorter clips, subtitles, and local faces/landmarks.
• Peak engagement windows: Weekday evenings (about 7–9 pm) and Saturday mornings; midday bumps on workdays.
• Local trust signals: Posts citing named local sources (schools, sheriff, road district, utility co-ops) get faster shares; admins of community groups often act as informal moderators.
• Cross-posting patterns: Businesses cross-post Facebook/Instagram; creators reuse TikTok to Reels; parents and booster clubs amplify sports and school content.
• Demographic tilt: Older median age keeps Facebook sticky; younger cohort prioritizes Stories, Streaks, and DMs over feed posts.

Notes on method

• Figures are directional estimates built from Pew Research Center social media adoption (2023–2024 adults and teens), rural vs. urban usage gaps, platform skews, and Edgar County’s population structure from recent Census/ACS releases. County-level survey data are limited; use these for planning rather than precise measurement.