Jay County

Jay County, Indiana — key demographics

Population

• Total population: 20,478 (2020 Census)
• 2023 estimate: ~20,200 (U.S. Census Bureau, Vintage 2023)

Age and sex (ACS 2018–2022)

• Median age: ~41.5 years
• Age distribution: under 18: ~24%; 18–24: ~8%; 25–44: ~24–25%; 45–64: ~25–26%; 65+: ~18%
• Sex: ~50% female, ~50% male

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census; race alone or in combination; Hispanic can be any race)

• White: ~94–95%
• Black or African American: ~0.3–0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.2–0.3%
• Asian: ~0.2–0.3%
• Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander: ~0.0–0.1%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~5–6%
• Non-Hispanic White: ~90–91%

Households and housing (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~8,000
• Average household size: ~2.5–2.6
• Family households: ~68% of households; average family size ~3.0
• Married-couple households: ~50% of all households
• Households with children under 18: ~30%
• One-person households: ~28% (about 12% are 65+ living alone)
• Tenure: ~76% owner-occupied, ~24% renter-occupied

Insights

• Small, largely rural county with stable-to-slowly declining population since 2010
• Predominantly White with a modest Hispanic/Latino community
• Older-than-state median age profile and high owner-occupancy typical of rural Indiana

Jay County, IN snapshot

• Population and density: ~20,500 residents; ~53 people per sq. mile (rural).
• Estimated email users: ~15,000. Assumes ~92% usage among adults and ~75% of residents age 18+, yielding ~73% of total population using email.

Age distribution of email users (estimated)

• 13–17: 4%
• 18–34: 24%
• 35–54: 34%
• 55–64: 16%
• 65+: 22%

Gender split

• Approximately 50% female, 50% male, mirroring county demographics and near‑equal adoption by gender.

Digital access and connectivity trends

• Broadband adoption: 77% of households have a broadband subscription; device access (computer/tablet) ~86–88%. Both trail Indiana’s statewide broadband adoption (85%).
• Smartphone‑only access: elevated for a rural county at roughly 18–22%, driving strong mobile email reliance.
• Coverage pattern: stronger fixed broadband along primary corridors and in/around Portland and Dunkirk, with patchier service in outlying townships; ongoing state‑supported rural fiber builds are improving availability but adoption gaps persist.

Implications

• Adult email reach is reliable, but a meaningful share—especially seniors and farm‑area households—access email via smartphones or shared/public Wi‑Fi. Prioritize mobile‑optimized, low‑bandwidth email designs and clear text rendering to maximize deliverability and readability.

Jay County, Indiana — mobile phone usage snapshot (2024)

Headline

• Mobile use is widespread but more utilitarian than data‑heavy: adoption is high, yet households rely on cellular in lieu of fixed broadband more often than the Indiana average, and 5G mid‑band capacity is spottier than in metros. The county’s older, lower‑income profile depresses top‑end smartphone uptake and average mobile speeds relative to state benchmarks.

User estimates

• Population and households: ~20,300 residents; ~7,900 households (ACS 2018–2022 five‑year; rounded).
• Households with smartphones: ~6,800 (≈86% of households), versus Indiana ≈90%.
• Household internet mix:
  • Broadband subscription (any): ~6,000 households (≈76%), vs Indiana ≈83%.
  • Cellular data plan as the only home internet: ~950 households (≈12%), vs Indiana ≈8–9%.
  • No home internet subscription: ~1,400 households (≈18%), vs Indiana ≈12%.
• Individual smartphone users (modeled):
  • Adults 18+: ~13,400 users (≈86–88% of adults), derived by applying age‑specific smartphone adoption rates to Jay County’s older age structure.
  • Teens 13–17: ~1,250 users (≈95% of teens).
  • Total 13+ smartphone users: ≈14,700.
  • Basic/feature‑phone users (adult): ~900 (≈6% of adults), higher than the state share due to a larger 65+ cohort.

Demographic patterns behind usage

• Age: 65+ share is a few points higher than state average (≈19% vs ≈17% statewide). Seniors depress smartphone penetration and increase the share of basic phones and shared household devices.
• Income and affordability: Median household income trails the Indiana median by a meaningful margin; this correlates with:
  • Higher reliance on prepaid plans and budget Android devices.
  • Greater incidence of “cellular‑only” home internet and data‑capped plans.
• Education and labor mix: A smaller college‑educated share and a larger share in agriculture/light manufacturing correlate with pragmatic, coverage‑first carrier choices and less premium‑device churn.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Facilities‑based carriers present: AT&T, T‑Mobile, Verizon; most MVNOs operate via these networks.
• 4G LTE coverage: Near‑universal coverage of populated areas by at least one carrier per FCC mobile maps; multi‑carrier overlap is good along US‑27 and IN‑67, thinner in sparsely populated townships and along county borders.
• 5G:
  • Low‑band 5G: Broad, largely countywide from all three carriers; improves reach but not capacity.
  • Mid‑band 5G (capacity): T‑Mobile n41 2.5 GHz present in and around Portland and along primary corridors; Verizon C‑band (n77) present but more limited; AT&T mid‑band more limited than in Indiana metros. Result: capacity hotspots exist, but large swaths fall back to LTE/low‑band 5G.
• Fixed wireless access (FWA): T‑Mobile Home Internet is widely available; Verizon 5G/LTE Home covers a smaller footprint. Multiple WISPs serve outlying areas. FWA adoption is above the state average, reflecting gaps in affordable wired broadband.
• Public safety: AT&T FirstNet Band 14 sites cover primary population centers and corridors, improving resilience for first responders.
• Backhaul and build trajectory: Fiber backhaul follows main corridors; incremental C‑band/2.5 GHz infill since 2023 has improved capacity in and around Portland, with rural sectors still prioritized for coverage over throughput.

How Jay County differs from the Indiana norm

• Slightly lower smartphone presence at the household level (≈86% vs ≈90%).
• Higher reliance on cellular as primary home internet (≈12% vs ≈8–9%) and a larger no‑subscription share (≈18% vs ≈12%), indicating cost and wireline availability constraints.
• Older age mix yields:
  • Fewer premium devices and slightly lower individual smartphone adoption among seniors.
  • Higher basic‑phone share (≈6% of adults, above state).
• Capacity, not coverage, is the limiting factor: 4G/low‑band 5G reach is strong, but mid‑band 5G footprints are patchier than in metro Indiana, so sustained high‑throughput performance and multi‑user capacity lag state urban averages.
• Plan mix skews more prepaid/value and less postpaid‑premium than statewide, reflecting income and device replacement cycles.

What this means in practice

• Expect strong signal availability across most populated areas but more variability in speeds and indoor performance outside Portland and major corridors.
• Mobile networks shoulder a larger share of home connectivity than in Indiana overall; FWA is a meaningful bridge where cable/fiber is limited.
• Continued mid‑band 5G infill and additional fiber backhaul are the levers most likely to close the capacity and speed gap with state urban benchmarks.

Jay County, Indiana — social media usage (2025 snapshot)

Population and access

• Residents: ~20,300 (2023 Census estimate); adults 18+: ~15,400
• Households with broadband subscription: ~75–80% (ACS; typical for rural IN counties)

How many people use social platforms

• Adults (18+): ~10,600 use at least one social networking app (≈69% adult penetration, excluding YouTube)
• Teens (13–17): ~1,300 use social platforms (≈95% penetration)
• Total 13+: ~11,900 regular social-network users

Age mix of users (share of local users, 13+)

• 13–17: ~11%
• 18–29: ~19%
• 30–49: ~31%
• 50–64: ~20%
• 65+: ~19%

Gender breakdown (overall users)

• Women: ~52%
• Men: ~48%

Most-used platforms among adults (18+) — estimated penetration and counts

• YouTube: ~80% (≈12,300 adults)
• Facebook: ~69% (≈10,600)
• Instagram: ~38% (≈5,900)
• Pinterest: ~32% (≈4,900)
• Snapchat: ~32% (≈4,900)
• TikTok: ~30% (≈4,600)
• X (Twitter): ~21% (≈3,200)
• LinkedIn: ~18% (≈2,800)
• Reddit: ~16% (≈2,500)
• Nextdoor: ~6% (≈900)

Behavioral trends observed in rural Midwest counties like Jay

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of Groups and Marketplace for local news, events, school activities, and buy/sell/trade. Older adults over-index on Facebook; evening engagement (7–10 pm) is highest. Short native video and photo albums outperform link posts.
• YouTube is the largest reach vehicle: strong interest in DIY, farming, auto repair, home projects, and local sports highlights. Weekend and evening watch time peaks; skippable in-stream ads deliver efficient local reach.
• Younger cohorts split time across Snapchat, Instagram, and TikTok:
  • Snapchat is the primary messaging and Stories platform for teens and college-age; streaks and group chats drive daily opens.
  • TikTok and Instagram Reels dominate short-form viewing and discovery for 18–34; local businesses use trends/audio for reach beyond followers.
• Pinterest is influential among women 25–54 for home, crafts, recipes, and seasonal retail planning; saves and link-outs are strong.
• Messaging behavior: Facebook Messenger is ubiquitous across ages; Snapchat messaging is dominant for under-30. WhatsApp usage is limited overall, with pockets in multilingual or manufacturing workplaces.
• Content that performs best: hyper-local faces and places (school teams, community events, weather impacts), practical tips, giveaways, and behind-the-scenes from local businesses. Posts with clear place-tags and community hashtags see better reach.
• Platform skews: women over-index on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube and Reddit. TikTok and Snapchat skew younger and slightly female.
• Local advertising notes: Facebook/Instagram offer cost-efficient geo-targeting at the ZIP/city level; YouTube provides broad, low-CPM county reach; short, captioned vertical video is the most portable creative across platforms.

How these figures were derived

• Population and broadband: U.S. Census Bureau/ACS (latest available).
• Adoption rates: Pew Research Center’s 2024 social media use by platform, age, and rural vs. urban segments. Local estimates apply those rates to Jay County’s population structure; figures rounded to the nearest hundred. YouTube is reported separately from “social networking” penetration, which is why its adult reach can exceed the “any social network” figure.