Massac County

Massac County, Illinois — key demographics

Population

• 14,169 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~44 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Gender

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49%

Race/ethnicity (Census/ACS)

• White alone: ~88%
• Black or African American alone: ~6.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~0.3%
• Asian alone: ~0.4%
• Two or more races: ~4.6%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~2–3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~86%

Households and housing

• Households: ~6,080
• Persons per household: ~2.31
• Housing units: ~6,900
• Owner‑occupied housing rate: ~71%
• Median value of owner‑occupied homes: ~$95,500
• Median gross rent: ~$675

Insights

• Small, aging population with roughly equal shares of youth and seniors.
• Predominantly White, with Black residents as the largest minority; Hispanic share is low.
• Household sizes are modest and owner‑occupancy is relatively high for a rural county.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5‑year; QuickFacts)

Massac County, IL has ~14,000 residents, about 58 people per sq mi across ~240 sq mi (state average density ~231/sq mi). Estimated email users: ~10,700 (≈76% of total; ≈88% of residents age 13+).

Age distribution of email users:

• 13–17: 6% (0.6k)
• 18–34: 25% (2.7k)
• 35–54: 32% (3.4k)
• 55–64: 15% (1.6k)
• 65+: 22% (2.4k)

Gender split among users: female 51% (5.5k), male 49% (5.2k), reflecting the county’s population mix.

Digital access and trends:

• ~86% of households have a computer.
• ~78% subscribe to home broadband.
• ~11% are smartphone‑only for internet.
• ~11% have no home internet. Broadband subscription rates have risen ~3–5 percentage points since 2019. Upgrades are concentrated in population centers, while low‑density rural areas rely more on DSL or fixed wireless, correlating with lower adoption among seniors and lower‑income households.

Connectivity insights:

• Email engagement is stable to slightly rising, driven by smartphone access and the need for government, school, and healthcare portals.
• The main usage gap is among 65+ residents and homes without broadband, where service quality and affordability remain limiting factors.

Mobile phone usage snapshot: Massac County, Illinois (2024)

Scale and user estimates

• Population baseline: ~13,900 residents (U.S. Census Bureau 2023 estimate). Roughly 10,900 are adults (18+).
• Estimated mobile phone users: ~10,000–10,500 people (about 72–76% of the total population), driven primarily by adult smartphone use plus high teen ownership.
• Adult smartphone users: ~9,000–9,400 (applying current rural smartphone adoption rates).
• Teen smartphone users (13–17): ~800–900.
• Basic/feature‑phone users (mostly older adults): ~400–600.

Demographic breakdown of use

• Age
  • 18–34: Near‑universal smartphone ownership (~95%+). Heaviest mobile data consumption, video and social usage; early adopters of budget 5G plans.
  • 35–64: High ownership (~88–92%). Work‑related messaging, navigation, and streaming; common hotspot use when home internet is slow.
  • 65+: Ownership materially lower (~60–65%), but rising each year. Mix of smartphones and basic phones; bigger share relies on voice/SMS and telehealth apps.
• Income
  • Median household income is materially below the state median (~$47k vs Illinois ~$78k), which correlates with higher prepaid plan usage, lower average data spend, and higher Android share. Discount MVNOs (e.g., Cricket, Metro, Straight Talk) are over‑represented relative to the state.
• Education and work
  • Lower bachelor’s attainment than Illinois overall aligns with greater “smartphone‑only” internet reliance for work search, training, and gig work apps.
  • Commuting to Paducah, KY and along I‑24 concentrates peak mobile demand on the interstate corridor.

Key statistics (household technology, ACS 2018–2022)

• Households with a smartphone: Massac ~85% vs Illinois ~91%.
• Households with a cellular data plan (any mobile device): Massac ~67% vs Illinois ~78%.
• Smartphone‑only internet households (no wired broadband): Massac ~26% vs Illinois ~14%. These gaps are consistent with lower income and sparser fixed broadband options locally and translate into heavier day‑to‑day dependence on mobile data for essential connectivity than the state average.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Coverage and technology mix
  • 4G/LTE: Countywide outdoor coverage on major carriers is broad, especially in and around Metropolis, Joppa, Brookport, and along I‑24/US‑45.
  • 5G: Low‑band 5G covers population centers and the interstate corridor on AT&T and T‑Mobile; mid‑band 5G (C‑band/2.5 GHz) is present primarily along I‑24 and in/near Metropolis. Verizon mid‑band 5G is more corridor‑focused; ultra‑wideband/dense small‑cell footprints typical of metro Illinois are not present.
• Tower siting pattern
  • Sparse rural macro grid with sites clustered along I‑24, US‑45, and near Metropolis. Fewer infill nodes than suburban/urban Illinois; terrain and river adjacency create occasional dead zones on secondary roads and in low‑lying river bottoms.
• Fixed broadband context (drives mobile reliance)
  • Cable broadband is concentrated in Metropolis; DSL and fixed wireless are common outside town limits; fiber availability is limited. This pushes a higher share of households to use smartphones as primary internet and to hotspot for PCs/tablets.

Usage patterns that differ from the Illinois average

• Adoption level: Overall smartphone presence is 5–7 points lower than the state, primarily due to an older age structure and affordability constraints.
• Smartphone‑only connectivity: Roughly double the state share, reflecting gaps in wired broadband. Residents more often rely on mobile plans for schoolwork, job applications, streaming, and telehealth.
• Plan mix and devices: Prepaid and MVNO lines comprise a larger share of active lines; Android market share is higher and average handset prices lower than statewide.
• Network experience: Speeds are more variable than in metro Illinois. Mid‑band 5G delivers strong performance along I‑24 but falls back to LTE or low‑band 5G off‑corridor; indoor signal challenges occur in some river‑adjacent and wooded pockets.
• Cross‑border mobility: Proximity to Paducah and the Kentucky network grid means more cross‑market roaming/handovers and a commuter‑driven peak on interstate sectors, unlike most of Illinois.
• Public safety and resilience: AT&T FirstNet and carrier hardening on the I‑24 corridor provide better emergency coverage than many rural peers, yet redundancy is below urban Illinois norms; extended power outages can impact rural sectors sooner.

Implications

• Mobile is the primary on‑ramp to the internet for a notably larger slice of Massac County than Illinois overall; policies or programs that improve mid‑band 5G reach and affordable plan availability will yield outsized gains.
• Expanding fiber or high‑capacity fixed wireless outside Metropolis would likely reduce the smartphone‑only share and ease pressure on LTE/5G sectors that currently carry home‑internet‑like loads.
• Targeted senior adoption and affordability initiatives (subsidized devices/plans, digital literacy) would close much of the county’s remaining smartphone gap.

Sources and method

• U.S. Census Bureau 2023 population estimates; ACS 2018–2022 (S2801/S2802 Computer and Internet Use) for household smartphone/cellular plan/smartphone‑only measures.
• Pew Research Center 2023 smartphone adoption benchmarks to size adult and teen users; blended with rural adoption differentials.
• FCC Broadband Data Collection (2024) and carrier public coverage disclosures for 4G/5G footprint characterization in southern Illinois.

Social media usage in Massac County, Illinois (2025 snapshot)

Baseline and total users

• Population: 14,169 (U.S. Census, 2020).
• Adults (18+): approximately 11,000.
• Estimated social media users (13+): about 9,000 residents.
• Adult adoption (any platform): approximately 74% of adults (~8,100).

Most-used platforms (share of adult residents; modeled from Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. adoption, adjusted for rural/older demographics; rounded counts in parentheses)

• YouTube: 83% (9,100 adults)
• Facebook: 72% (7,900)
• Instagram: 37% (4,100)
• Pinterest: 32% (3,500)
• TikTok: 28% (3,100)
• Snapchat: 22% (2,400)
• X (Twitter): 17% (1,900)
• LinkedIn: 15% (1,700)
• Nextdoor: 6% (700)

Age patterns (share of each age group using at least one platform; Pew-based)

• Teens 13–17: ~95% use social; heaviest on TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube; Instagram strong, Facebook limited.
• 18–29: ~95%+; Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat dominant; YouTube near-universal; Facebook secondary.
• 30–49: ~91%; Facebook, YouTube core; Instagram growing; TikTok moderate.
• 50–64: ~77%; Facebook and YouTube lead; Pinterest notable; Instagram/TikTok lighter.
• 65+: ~50%; Facebook primary; YouTube for news/how‑to/church services; limited on other platforms.

Gender breakdown (local user base; directionally consistent with national patterns)

• Overall social media users: ~54% female, ~46% male (county skews slightly female).
• Platform skews:
  • More female: Pinterest (heavily), Facebook (slight), Instagram (slight), TikTok (moderate), Snapchat (moderate).
  • More male: YouTube (moderate), X/Twitter (moderate), Reddit (strong, but small base), Discord (small base).

Behavioral trends observed in rural/older Illinois counties and consistent with Massac County’s profile

• Facebook is the community hub: high engagement with local news, school sports, church updates, weather alerts, civic groups, and buy/sell/trade groups; Facebook Messenger widely used.
• Event-driven spikes: local festivals and regional draws (e.g., Metropolis’ Superman Celebration) trigger bursts of photo/video posts and hashtag use; small businesses increase promos around these events.
• Video is rising but pragmatic: short-form TikTok/Reels see strong passive viewing; creation is concentrated among younger users; YouTube dominates for how‑to, outdoors (hunting/fishing), repairs, and faith content.
• Small businesses prioritize Facebook Pages/Groups over Instagram-first strategies; boosting posts on Facebook often outperforms other paid options for reach and calls/messages.
• Instagram growth is steady among 20s–30s, but stories and reels outperform feed posts; cross-posting from Facebook common.
• Pinterest retains strong use among women for recipes, crafts, home, and seasonal planning.
• X/Twitter is niche (sports, regional news, severe weather) with low everyday posting.
• LinkedIn presence is limited and concentrated among educators, healthcare, public sector, and regional commuters.
• Nextdoor penetration is low; neighborhood conversation largely stays inside Facebook Groups.
• Access patterns favor evenings and early mornings; mobile-first usage dominates, so concise posts, vertical video, and clear CTAs perform best.

Notes on methodology and sources

• Population: U.S. Census Bureau (2020).
• Adoption rates and platform shares: Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. social media adoption and platform reach, adjusted to Massac County’s rural/older demographic mix to produce local estimates. Counts are rounded and represent modeled estimates, not platform-reported user totals.