Marshall County

Marshall County, Indiana — key demographics

Population

• 46,095 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age (ACS 2018–2022)

• Median age: ~39 years
• Under 18: ~25%
• 65 and over: ~17%

Gender (ACS 2018–2022)

• Male: ~50%
• Female: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (2020 Decennial Census unless noted)

• White alone: ~86–87%
• Black or African American alone: ~0.8–1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~0.5–0.6%
• Asian alone: ~0.7%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander alone: ~0.1%
• Some other race alone: ~5%
• Two or more races: ~6%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~12–13%
• Non-Hispanic White alone: ~77–78%

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Total households: ~17,500
• Average household size: ~2.6–2.7
• Family households: ~69% of households
• Owner-occupied: ~75–76%; renter-occupied: ~24–25%
• Average family size: ~3.1

Insights

• Stable population around 46k with a median age near 39, indicating a slightly older-than-state profile.
• Predominantly White, with a significant and growing Hispanic community (~1 in 8 residents).
• Housing is majority owner-occupied, and households skew toward families.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates.

Marshall County, IN overview (population approx. 46,100; density about 102 residents per sq. mile)

Estimated email users: approx. 34,300 residents (age 13+), derived from county age structure and national email adoption rates.

Age distribution of email users (share; approx. count):

• 13–17: 6% (~2,100)
• 18–34: 28% (~9,600)
• 35–54: 35% (~12,000)
• 55–64: 16% (~5,500)
• 65+: 15% (~5,100)

Gender split among email users: roughly 50% female and 50% male (about 17,150 each), mirroring the county’s overall sex distribution.

Digital access and connectivity trends:

• About 90% of households have a computer; about 84% maintain a home broadband subscription.
• Roughly 10% of households rely on smartphone-only internet; about 6% report no internet subscription.
• Access is strongest in population centers (e.g., Plymouth) with wider availability of cable/fiber; more remote townships rely more on DSL/WISPs, though state Next Level Connections build-outs are extending fiber to previously unserved locations.

Insight: With high device and broadband availability, email is effectively ubiquitous among working-age adults, with slightly lower adoption among seniors and teens.

Mobile phone usage in Marshall County, Indiana — 2024 snapshot

Key takeaways that differ from the state:

• Higher reliance on mobile-only internet at home: about 18–20% of households in Marshall County use a cellular data plan with no wired broadband, several points above the Indiana average (~13–15%).
• Slightly lower smartphone penetration than the state: adult smartphone adoption is a bit below the statewide level (Marshall ~88–90% vs Indiana ~91–92%), driven by an older and more rural mix and a small Plain/Amish presence.
• Rural performance gap: median mobile speeds outside towns trail the state median; towns along US‑30/US‑31 test near statewide levels, but farm and lake-adjacent areas are notably slower and more variable.
• Prepaid and “budget” plans are used more often than the Indiana average, reflecting a larger rural and Hispanic share and lower median incomes.

User and household estimates (rounded)

• Adult smartphone users: ~31,000–33,000 residents (out of roughly 34,000 adults), implying adult smartphone adoption around 88–90%.
• Total mobile phone users (including teens and basic phones): ~34,000–36,000 residents.
• Households: ~17,500–18,000.
  • Households with any cellular data plan: ~75–78% (≈13,300–14,000 households).
  • Cellular-only households (no wired internet): ~18–20% (≈3,200–3,600 households), above the state share.
  • No home internet subscription: ~9–11% (≈1,600–2,000 households), above the state share.

Demographic patterns

• Age: Younger adults (18–34) approach near-universal smartphone use (~96–98%). Middle-aged adults (35–64) are in the low‑90%s. Seniors 65+ are in the mid‑60%s locally, several points lower than Indiana’s seniors overall, which pulls down the county average.
• Income: Lower-income households are more likely to be mobile-only for home internet compared with the state average; affordability and availability both play roles.
• Ethnicity and language: A larger Hispanic/Latino share than the state average translates into higher use of prepaid plans and OTT messaging (e.g., WhatsApp), and higher mobile-only home connectivity compared with non‑Hispanic households.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage: 4G LTE is effectively universal by population across the county. 5G low‑band is widespread; mid‑band 5G (e.g., T‑Mobile “UC” and Verizon C‑band) is strongest along US‑30, US‑31, and in towns like Plymouth and Culver, with weaker mid‑band depth in outlying townships.
• Speeds:
  • Towns and corridors: typical 5G median downloads ~120–250 Mbps when on mid‑band; LTE areas ~20–60 Mbps.
  • Rural/off‑corridor: median downloads commonly ~40–70 Mbps, with greater variability and occasional sub‑10 Mbps pockets indoors or in low‑lying/wooded areas.
  • State comparison: Indiana’s overall mobile median is higher, so Marshall’s rural medians underperform the statewide figure, while its town‑center speeds are comparable.
• Capacity and congestion: Evening and weekend congestion is more pronounced around Plymouth, Culver/Lake Maxinkuckee, and US‑31, reflecting commuter and seasonal spikes.
• Home broadband substitutes: Fixed‑wireless 5G home internet has meaningful county coverage (particularly from mid‑band deployments), and Starlink fills some of the hardest‑to‑serve edges. These options contribute to the higher cellular‑only share versus the state.
• Fiber and grants: Ongoing state and federal programs (e.g., Indiana’s Next Level Connections and the BEAD framework) continue to fund last‑mile fiber in northern Indiana; as those builds complete through 2025–2026, the share of cellular‑only households should gradually fall, starting near towns and along major corridors.

What’s most different from Indiana overall

• More households rely solely on mobile data plans for home connectivity, and a larger slice reports no home internet at all.
• Smartphone adoption among seniors is lower than the state average, dampening the county’s overall adoption rate.
• The urban‑rural performance split is sharper: town centers achieve state‑like 5G speeds, while agricultural and lake‑adjacent areas see notably lower and more variable performance.
• Prepaid penetration and OTT messaging reliance are higher than the statewide mix, reflecting local demographics and affordability preferences.

Notes on sources and methodology

• Figures are synthesized from the latest available American Community Survey computer/internet indicators, state broadband program disclosures, carrier coverage/performance reporting, and national smartphone adoption benchmarks (2023–2024). Counts are rounded and expressed as 2024 estimates to align disparate reporting periods.

Social media usage in Marshall County, Indiana (2025)

Topline user stats

• Population base: ~46,000 residents; ~39,000 are age 13+
• Estimated social media users (13+): ~31,300 (≈68% of total residents; ≈80% of 13+)
• Gender among users: 53% women, 47% men

Age mix of users (share of local social users)

• 13–17: 8%
• 18–24: 10%
• 25–34: 17%
• 35–44: 18%
• 45–54: 17%
• 55–64: 15%
• 65+: 15%

Most-used platforms (share of local social users)

• YouTube: 82%
• Facebook: 78%
• Facebook Messenger: 69%
• Instagram: 44%
• TikTok: 36%
• Pinterest: 31% (skews female)
• Snapchat: 28% (concentrated under 35)
• WhatsApp: 20% (higher among Hispanic households)
• LinkedIn: 18%
• X (Twitter): 17% (skews male)
• Reddit: 14% (skews male, 18–34)
• Nextdoor: 9% (limited neighborhood coverage)

Behavioral trends and engagement patterns

• Community-first: Strong reliance on Facebook Groups and local pages for schools, high school sports, churches, city/county updates, and buy/sell (Marketplace-heavy).
• Video-centric: High YouTube watch time on smart TVs; short-form video (Reels/TikTok) drives discovery, with Facebook Reels reaching older cohorts.
• Messaging over posting: Private sharing via Messenger/DMs is common for local events, recommendations, and deals.
• Timing: Peaks 6–8 a.m. and 7–10 p.m.; Sunday afternoons are strong on Facebook. Real-time spikes during severe weather and varsity sports.
• Commerce: Marketplace and local service inquiries (home, auto, ag, trades) are frequent; coupon/offer posts outperform generic branding.
• Demographic nuances: Women over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube, X, and Reddit. Bilingual (English/Spanish) content performs well in and around Plymouth.
• Content that works: Event flyers, short highlights, before/after project photos, live video, and posts naming specific towns/schools. Authentic, locally shot photos outperform stock.

Data notes

• Figures are 2025 county-level estimates modeled from Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. platform adoption, rural-Midwest patterns, and the county’s age/sex mix from recent Census/ACS; suitable for planning and channel prioritization.