Martin County

Key demographics — Martin County, Indiana

Population

• Total population: 10,327 (2020 Census)
• 2023 population estimate: ~10.1k (U.S. Census Population Estimates Program)

Age

• Median age: ~43 years
• Under 18: ~23%
• 65 and over: ~20%

Gender

• Male: ~50–51%
• Female: ~49–50%

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census; share of total population)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~93%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2–3%
• Two or more races: ~2–3%
• Black or African American: <1%
• Asian: <1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: <1% combined

Households and housing (ACS 5‑year)

• Households: ~4,100
• Average household size: ~2.5
• Family households: ~66%; married‑couple families: ~50%
• Households with children under 18: ~27–30%
• Owner‑occupied housing rate: ~78–80%; renter‑occupied: ~20–22%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5‑year estimates; 2023 Population Estimates Program).

• Context: Martin County, IN has ≈10,300 residents across ≈340 sq mi (≈30 people/sq mi), making it among Indiana’s least-dense counties.

• Estimated email users: ≈7,800–8,200 residents age 13+ use email regularly, driven by near‑universal adult adoption.

• Age mix of email users (approx. share):

  • 13–17: 6–7%
  • 18–34: 22–24%
  • 35–54: 32–34%
  • 55–64: 18–20%
  • 65+: 20–22% The county’s older age profile raises the 55+ share versus urban areas.

• Gender split: Rough parity (≈49–51% each); no material gender gap in email usage.

• Digital access and trends:

  • Broadband subscription: ≈75–80% of households; fixed high‑speed access is uneven outside towns like Shoals and Loogootee.
  • Smartphone‑only internet users: ≈10–15% of adults, reflecting rural last‑mile gaps.
  • Computer access: ≈80–85% of households; public Wi‑Fi at libraries/schools supplements access.
  • Fiber footprint expanding via utilities/co‑ops and around major employment centers (e.g., NSWC Crane area), improving reliability and speeds.
  • Satellite and fixed‑wireless fill coverage gaps in sparsely populated areas.

• Insight: Low population density and an older demographic sustain high, work‑oriented email reliance, while uneven fixed broadband keeps a nontrivial share smartphone‑dependent despite ongoing fiber buildouts.

Mobile phone usage in Martin County, Indiana (2025 snapshot)

Population baseline

• Residents: ≈10,200
• Adults (18+): ≈7,850

User estimates

• Adult smartphone users: ≈6,500 (≈83% of adults), below Indiana’s ≈89% adult smartphone adoption
• Households: ≈4,050
• Cellular-only internet households (no fixed home broadband, rely on mobile data/tethering): ≈1,000 (≈24%), notably higher than Indiana’s ≈17%
• Primary device access: ≈12–14% of adults are “smartphone-only” for internet use (Indiana ≈9–10%)

Demographic breakdown (how usage differs from the state)

• Age
  • 18–34: ≈95–97% smartphone adoption (near state average)
  • 35–64: ≈88–90% (slightly below state)
  • 65+: ≈62–66% (well below Indiana’s ≈70%+), pulling down the countywide rate due to a larger senior share
• Income
  • < $35k: ≈73–78% adoption (state ≈80%+); higher prepaid and budget-plan uptake
  • $35k–$75k: ≈86–90% (slightly below state)
  • $75k+: ≈94–96% (near state)
• Household composition
  • Higher share of smartphone-only households and households substituting fixed wireless access (FWA) for wireline broadband compared with Indiana overall
• Work profile
  • Defense/contractor employment linked to NSWC Crane increases AT&T/FirstNet usage and daytime device density near US 50/US 231 compared with the state average pattern

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage and technology mix
  • All three national carriers (AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile) have countywide LTE; 5G is present but predominantly low-band outside towns
  • Mid-band 5G (capacity layer) is concentrated in/near Loogootee and along US 50/US 231; much of the county remains LTE-first once off the corridors
  • AT&T FirstNet buildouts around NSWC Crane have measurably improved signal reliability versus many rural Indiana counties
• Speeds (typical user experience)
  • Town centers/corridors with mid-band 5G: roughly 150–350 Mbps down
  • Low-band 5G/LTE areas: roughly 10–80 Mbps down, often uplink-limited
  • River valleys, forested hollows, and bluff areas near Shoals show signal fades and single-carrier dominance more often than the state average
• Tower grid and terrain impact
  • Sparse macro-tower spacing typical of rural southwest Indiana produces wider cell footprints and more edge-of-cell usage than statewide norms
  • Terrain (East Fork White River valley, wooded ridges) creates localized dead zones; in-cabin coverage boosters and Wi‑Fi calling mitigate gaps more commonly than in urban/suburban Indiana
• Home internet substitution
  • T-Mobile and Verizon 5G FWA is available in and around Loogootee and along major routes; take-up is above the state average in lieu of cable/fiber, reinforcing higher cellular-only household rates

How Martin County differs from Indiana overall

• Lower adult smartphone adoption (≈83% vs ≈89%) driven by an older age structure and lower incomes
• Higher reliance on mobile data for home access (≈24% cellular-only households vs ≈17% statewide)
• More LTE-first usage and lower mid-band 5G availability away from highways/towns, translating to lower median speeds outside core corridors
• Stronger AT&T/FirstNet footprint and daytime usage near federal facilities compared with statewide patterns, slightly improving reliability on those corridors relative to neighboring rural counties
• Plan mix skews more toward prepaid/budget tiers, and Wi‑Fi calling/booster use is more prevalent due to terrain-related coverage variability

Notes on sources and methodology

• Population/household baselines align with recent ACS estimates and Census rollups; adoption and cellular-only shares are derived from applying 2024–2025 Pew/FCC/ACS rural adoption patterns to Martin County’s age/income mix; infrastructure points reflect carrier public coverage filings and observed rural deployment patterns in southwest Indiana.

Martin County, IN social media snapshot (2025)

Scope and method: Figures are 2025 modeled estimates for Martin County, derived from U.S. Census Bureau ACS population structure and Pew Research Center 2023–2024 social media adoption (with rural adjustments). Expect a ±3–5 percentage-point margin.

Headline user stats

• Population base: ~10,200 residents; ~8,700 aged 13+
• Estimated social media users (13+): ~6,300 (≈62% of total population; ≈72% of 13+)

Age breakdown of social media users (share of all local users)

• 13–17: 9% (580 users)
• 18–29: 19% (1,200)
• 30–49: 35% (2,230) — largest cohort
• 50–64: 24% (1,490)
• 65+: 13% (830)

Gender breakdown of users

• Female: ~52%
• Male: ~48% Notes: Women over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube and Reddit.

Most-used platforms in Martin County (share of local social media users)

• YouTube: ~82%
• Facebook: ~78%
• Instagram: ~38%
• Pinterest: ~34%
• TikTok: ~31%
• Snapchat: ~24%
• X/Twitter: ~17%
• LinkedIn: ~14%
• Reddit: ~13%
• WhatsApp: ~12%
• Nextdoor: ~4%

Age-pattern highlights (platform reach tendencies)

• Teens (13–17): Very high on YouTube and Snapchat; strong on TikTok and Instagram; Facebook comparatively low.
• 18–29: Heavy Instagram/TikTok use alongside YouTube; Snapchat still common; Facebook for events/groups, less for posting.
• 30–49: Facebook and YouTube dominant; Instagram moderate; TikTok usage growing; Pinterest notable among women.
• 50–64: Facebook is primary; YouTube strong; limited Instagram/TikTok.
• 65+: Facebook and YouTube lead; other platforms minimal.

Behavioral trends

• Community-centric Facebook usage: Local groups and pages (schools, churches, county offices, youth sports) drive reliable reach; Marketplace is the top peer-to-peer commerce channel.
• Video-first consumption: YouTube for how-to, repairs, and hobby content; Facebook Reels/TikTok gaining for quick local updates and entertainment.
• Event- and season-driven spikes: Weather alerts, school athletics, festivals, hunting/fishing seasons, and county announcements generate outsized engagement.
• Messaging funnels: Facebook Messenger prevalent among adults; Snapchat dominates teen communication; SMS remains common in parallel.
• Trust and engagement: Posts from recognizable local institutions and personalities outperform brand pages; group posts often exceed page posts in organic reach.
• Advertising implications: For broad county reach, Facebook (+Groups) and YouTube are the most efficient buys; Instagram/TikTok to reach under-35; Pinterest effective for DIY, recipes, crafts; X/Twitter niche (sports/news followers); LinkedIn limited.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (2019–2023) and Pew Research Center Social Media Use (2023–2024). Figures are localized estimates built from these datasets.