Pulaski County

Pulaski County, Illinois — key demographics

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

• Population size:

  • 5,193 (2020 Census)
  • Down from 6,161 in 2010 (approx. -16%), indicating sustained decline

• Age:

  • Median age: about 46–47 years (ACS 2019–2023)
  • Under 18: about 19%
  • 65 and over: about 23%

• Gender:

  • Female: about 51%
  • Male: about 49%

• Racial/ethnic composition (2020 Census; Hispanic is an ethnicity overlapping with race):

  • White alone: about 63%
  • Black or African American alone: about 31%
  • Two or more races: about 4%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, and other races: each about 1% or less
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): about 2–3%

• Households (ACS 2019–2023):

  • Total households: about 2,200–2,300
  • Average household size: about 2.2
  • Family households: about 59% of households
  • One-person households: roughly one-third
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: around 70–75%

Insights:

• Small, aging county with continued population decline
• Racially more diverse than many rural Illinois counties, with a sizable Black population share
• Household sizes are modest and homeownership is relatively high for a rural area

Pulaski County, IL email usage (estimates based on county population and national adoption patterns)

• Estimated email users: ~3,600 residents (≈85% of those age 13+).
• Age distribution of email users: 13–17: 5%; 18–34: 23%; 35–54: 32%; 55–64: 18%; 65+: 22%.
• Gender split among email users: ~51% female, 49% male.
• Frequency: Most working-age users check email daily; seniors slightly less frequent but majority are regular users.

Digital access and trends

• About three-quarters of households maintain a home broadband subscription; roughly four in five have a computer. Smartphone ownership is widespread, and ~12–15% of households are effectively smartphone‑only for internet.
• Access is improving with recent fiber and fixed‑wireless buildouts, but subscription and speed tiers still trail Illinois averages, and affordability remains a barrier for lower‑income households.
• Public Wi‑Fi (schools, libraries, municipal sites) remains an important access point for some residents.

Local density/connectivity facts

• Very low population density (≈25–26 people per square mile) and dispersed settlement make last‑mile infrastructure costly, yielding uneven high‑speed coverage outside town centers (e.g., Mound City/Mounds), which in turn depresses email and broader digital service adoption among older and lower‑income segments.

Pulaski County, Illinois — mobile phone usage snapshot (2024)

Scale and user base

• Residents: ≈5,100; households: ≈2,100
• Adult smartphone users: ≈3,600 (about 88% of adults), reflecting strong overall adoption despite rural constraints

Ownership and access (Pulaski County vs Illinois; latest ACS/NTIA-aligned estimates)

• Households with at least one smartphone: ≈85% vs ≈92% statewide
• Households with a cellular data plan: ≈69% vs ≈78%
• Mobile-only internet households (cellular data plan but no cable/DSL/fiber): ≈13% vs ≈7%
• Households with no internet subscription of any kind: ≈21% vs ≈12%

Demographic breakdown (key divergences from the Illinois average)

• Age
  • 18–34: near-universal smartphone adoption (≈96%), in line with state
  • 35–64: high adoption (≈90%), modestly below state
  • 65+: markedly lower adoption (≈60–65%) vs ≈75% statewide; this age gap is wider than the state’s, and it depresses overall county penetration
• Income
  • Under $25k households show high smartphone presence but much higher mobile-only reliance (≈30%) than the state norm, driven by lower fixed-broadband availability and cost sensitivity
• Race/ethnicity
  • Black households (a larger share locally than statewide) exhibit similar smartphone ownership rates to White households but higher mobile-only reliance, reflecting affordability and infrastructure disparities
• Plan mix and usage
  • Prepaid share is noticeably higher than the state average, with more month-to-month plans and data-capped offerings; hotspot use for home connectivity is also more common than statewide

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage and technology
  • All three national carriers provide 4G LTE; 5G is present countywide primarily on low-band spectrum
  • Mid-band 5G capacity is concentrated along I‑57 and nearby towns (Ullin, Mounds, Mound City); interior rural tracts rely on LTE or low-band 5G with lower capacity
  • River bottoms and lightly populated areas show persistent weak signal or dead zones, especially indoors
• Speeds and capacity
  • Where mid-band 5G is available, typical real-world downlink ranges from roughly 100–300 Mbps; elsewhere, LTE or low-band 5G commonly delivers 5–25 Mbps with higher variability at peak times
• Backhaul and sites
  • Macrocell sites are colocated along major corridors and near towns, with fiber-fed sites clustered around I‑57; many outlying sites depend on microwave backhaul, constraining capacity during busy periods
• Fixed broadband interplay
  • Fiber-to-the-home availability remains well below the statewide rate, and cable/DSL quality is inconsistent across rural tracts; this under-provisioning materially increases reliance on mobile data plans for primary internet access

Trends that differ from the Illinois state profile

• Higher reliance on mobile-only internet, particularly among lower-income and Black households
• Larger age-driven adoption gap, with substantially lower smartphone use among seniors
• Lower 5G capacity share (more low-band, less mid-band), producing slower median speeds and more variability
• Greater prevalence of prepaid plans and hotspot use, reflecting cost management and gaps in fixed broadband
• More pronounced coverage challenges in sparsely populated and river-adjacent areas, sustaining pockets of limited indoor service

Implications

• Public services, healthcare, and schools benefit from mobile-first design and low-bandwidth options, given the higher mobile-only reliance and variable speeds
• Retail and civic engagement strategies should emphasize SMS, Facebook, and lightweight mobile web over app-heavy or high-bandwidth experiences
• Network investments with the highest payoff include mid-band 5G infill along secondary roads, fiber backhaul to existing sites, and targeted indoor coverage solutions for civic/health facilities in rural tracts

Sources and methods

• Estimates align with 2019–2023 American Community Survey computer and internet access tables, NTIA Internet Use Survey patterns for rural counties, Pew Research smartphone adoption benchmarks (2023–2024), and FCC mobile coverage data through 2024 Q3. Figures are synthesized to county scale and benchmarked against Illinois statewide statistics to highlight divergences.

Pulaski County, IL — Social media usage snapshot (2025)

Context and user base

• Population: 5,193 (2020 Census). Adults ≈ 80% (~4,100).
• Data basis: Platform percentages use Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. adult usage; local percentages are modeled estimates adjusted for Pulaski’s older, rural profile. Counts overlap across platforms.

Most-used platforms (estimated share of adults in Pulaski using each)

• YouTube: 80–85% (U.S.: 83%). Broad reach across all ages; primary video platform.
• Facebook: 70–75% (U.S.: 68%). Highest daily-use platform locally; strong groups/Marketplace use.
• Instagram: 35–45% (U.S.: 47%). Concentrated among under-50 adults.
• TikTok: 25–30% (U.S.: 33%). Fast growth in 18–39; lower in 50+.
• Snapchat: 18–25% (U.S.: 27%). Mostly under-30.
• Pinterest: 32–40% (U.S.: 35%). Skews female; common for recipes, crafts, home.
• X (Twitter): 15–20% (U.S.: ~22%). Niche; news/sports followers.
• LinkedIn: 15–20% (U.S.: ~30%). Lower due to age/industry mix.
• Reddit: 12–18% (U.S.: ~22%). Younger/male skew; hobby/tech niches.
• WhatsApp: 10–15% (U.S.: ~21%). Limited except for specific family/work groups.

Age-group patterns (share tendencies and platform mix)

• 18–29: Heavy on YouTube (90%+), Instagram (75–80%), Snapchat (60–65%), TikTok (60%). Facebook used but not central. Messaging and short-form video dominant.
• 30–49: YouTube (90%), Facebook (70%), Instagram (50%), TikTok (35–40%). Frequent Marketplace use; family logistics via Messenger.
• 50–64: Facebook (70%+), YouTube (80%+); Instagram (25–30%), TikTok (20–25%). News, community groups, how-to videos.
• 65+: Facebook (35–40%), YouTube (45–50%); limited on others. Messenger key for family contact.

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall social media use is roughly even by gender locally.
• Women over-index on Facebook, Instagram, and especially Pinterest (majority female user base).
• Men over-index on YouTube, Reddit, X, and LinkedIn.
• Messaging split: Facebook Messenger broadly used; Snapchat messaging skews female under 30.

Behavioral trends and engagement

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups and Pages for local news, schools, churches, and buy/sell dominate discovery; Marketplace is a top commerce touchpoint.
• Video consumption: High passive viewing on YouTube (including Shorts); TikTok growth among under-40. Creation rates are lower than consumption; reposted/recycled short video performs well.
• Messaging and DMs: Facebook Messenger is the default for adults; Snapchat for under-30 social circles. Group chats coordinate local events and services.
• Local information diet: Many residents get local updates via Facebook (group posts, local officials, regional media pages). Weather, road conditions, and school updates drive spikes.
• Device and timing: Mobile-first; evening and weekend peaks. Short, captioned video and image posts with clear local cues outperform.
• Advertising response: Practical offers, giveaways, and time-bound deals convert best. Geo-targeting within ~15–30 miles and creative featuring recognizable local scenes/people lift CTR and saves.

Notes

• Figures are best-available estimates tailored from Pew Research Center (2024) platform adoption and known rural/age skews, applied to Pulaski County’s small, older population base (U.S. Census 2020/ACS). Direct county-level platform surveys are not published; use these as planning baselines.