Vigo County

Vigo County, Indiana — key demographics (U.S. Census Bureau; 2020 Decennial Census and ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimates; rounded):

Population

• Total population: ~106,800 (2023 estimate; 2020 Census ≈106,700)

Age

• Median age: ~37
• Under 18: ~21%
• 65 and over: ~17%

Sex

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49%

Race and ethnicity

• Non-Hispanic White: ~82–83%
• Black or African American: ~8%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~3–4%
• Asian: ~2%
• Two or more races: ~4%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.3%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: ~0.1%

Households and housing

• Households: ~41,000
• Average household size: ~2.36
• Family households: ~58% of households
• Married-couple households: ~42% of households
• Individuals living alone: ~33% (≈12% age 65+)
• Homeownership rate: ~64%

Insights

• County is relatively young with a sizable college-age population (Indiana State University influence), smaller household sizes than the state average, and predominantly White with notable Black and growing Hispanic populations.

Vigo County, IN email usage snapshot

• Population baseline: ~107,000 residents (2020 Census); density ≈260 people/sq mi. Over half live in Terre Haute.
• Estimated email users (age 13+): 80,000–85,000 (≈75–80% of residents), reflecting high adoption among connected adults.
• Age distribution of email users: 13–17: 7%; 18–29: 24%; 30–49: 33% (largest cohort); 50–64: 22%; 65+: 14%.
• Gender split among users: ~51% female, 49% male; usage is near parity by gender.
• Digital access trends: 82–85% of households subscribe to broadband; home computer/device access near 90%. Smartphone ownership exceeds 85%, with about 10–15% of households relying primarily on smartphones for internet. Public Wi‑Fi is widely available via Indiana State University and Vigo County Public Library branches. Indiana’s Next Level Connections investments since 2020 have expanded fiber and fixed‑wireless coverage, improving availability outside the urban core.
• Local connectivity insight: Broadband take‑up and speeds are higher in Terre Haute and along the I‑70 corridor than in rural townships; email engagement mirrors this urban‑rural access gap.

Estimates synthesize U.S. Census/ACS indicators and Pew Research on email/internet adoption to provide a localized, data‑driven view of Vigo County.

Vigo County, IN — mobile phone usage snapshot (2024–2025)

User estimates

• Population baseline: ~106,600 residents; ~85,100 adults (18+); ~41,500 households.
• Smartphone users (18+): ~76,000 adults, implying ~89% adult smartphone penetration.
• Smartphone users (13+): ~81,600 people when including teens 13–17.
• Wireless-only for voice: roughly 3 in 4 households have abandoned a traditional landline, consistent with a heavily mobile-first profile.
• Home internet via cellular only: 12% of households (5,000) rely on a cellular data plan as their primary home internet, higher than the statewide share.
• Multi-line prevalence: multi-line family plans dominate among working-age households; prepaid accounts represent roughly one-third of consumer lines, several points above the statewide mix.

Demographic breakdown (drivers of adoption and use)

• 18–24 cohort is outsized due to Indiana State University; consequent effects include:
  • Very high smartphone adoption (~95%+ in this group) and heavy app/data reliance.
  • Above-average churn around academic calendar starts/ends and higher prepaid/MVNO usage.
• 25–49: near-universal smartphone ownership (>90%); multi-line plans and bundled device upgrades are common.
• 50–64: high ownership (~85–90%); increased use of large-screen devices and hotspotting in areas with weaker fixed broadband.
• 65+: solid majority on smartphones (~75%); mix of postpaid senior plans and value MVNOs; higher incidence of voice-over-LTE/VoNR calling issues in fringe areas.
• Income/geography effects: outside Terre Haute, lower median incomes and sparser fixed broadband correlate with greater mobile-only internet and prepaid adoption than the state average.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• 5G coverage:
  • T-Mobile mid-band (2.5 GHz n41) is broadly available in Terre Haute and along I-70/US-41 corridors, tapering in the southwest river bottoms.
  • Verizon mid-band (C-band n77) is established in the city, hospitals, university area, and along I-70; rural sectors more dependent on LTE and low-band 5G.
  • AT&T mid-band (C-band/3.45 GHz n77) covers core urban areas and highway corridors; broader county relies on low-band 5G/LTE.
• Typical user experience (outdoors, uncongested):
  • In-city mid-band 5G: ~150–300 Mbps down, 15–40 Mbps up; sub-20 ms latency on modern devices.
  • Countywide aggregate: ~70–120 Mbps down with mid-band coverage; 10–30 Mbps in LTE fallback zones; indoor speeds vary widely in older buildings.
• Coverage gaps: pockets of weak indoor service persist south and west of Terre Haute (Wabash bottomlands, low-density tracts) where tower spacing is wider and foliage/terrain attenuate signal.
• Capacity hotspots: campus/downtown, event venues, and I-70 interchanges see peak-hour congestion; carriers deploy additional sectors and small cells during major events.
• Public safety and accessibility: county supports text-to-911; VoLTE is standard; Wi‑Fi calling is often needed inside large concrete structures.

How Vigo County differs from Indiana overall

• Younger, more student-heavy population than the state average pushes:
  • Higher mobile-only internet reliance (about 12% vs lower statewide share).
  • Higher prepaid/MVNO usage and seasonal line churn.
• Fixed broadband subscription rates lag the state, especially outside the city; this shifts more daytime and home-evening traffic onto cellular networks.
• Mobile performance is bifurcated: in Terre Haute proper, speeds rival state medians; outside the core, median speeds and indoor reliability trail state levels more noticeably due to sparser mid-band 5G deployment and fewer infill sites.
• Landline abandonment is at least as high as the state and likely a touch higher given the age mix, reinforcing a mobile-first communications pattern.

Key takeaways

• ~76,000 adult smartphone users and ~81,600 users 13+ make mobile the dominant access channel for communications and internet in Vigo County.
• A distinct mobile-first segment (~1 in 8 households) uses cellular as primary home internet, measurably above the state share.
• Investments that extend mid-band 5G from Terre Haute deeper into southern and western census tracts, plus targeted indoor coverage (campus, hospitals, public venues), would close the county’s performance gap with the statewide experience.

Vigo County, IN — social media snapshot (2025-ready)

Population base

• Total population: ~107,000
• Adults (18+): ~84,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2022 profile for Vigo County)

Overall usage

• Expect 80–85% of adults to use at least one social platform regularly, given county broadband/smartphone adoption and alignment with U.S. usage patterns in similar Midwestern counties with a university presence.

Most‑used platforms among adults (estimated share of Vigo County adults; national Pew rates applied locally)

• YouTube: ~83%
• Facebook: ~68%
• Instagram: ~47–50%
• TikTok: ~33%
• Snapchat: ~30%
• Pinterest: ~35%
• LinkedIn: ~30–31%
• WhatsApp: ~29%
• X (Twitter): ~20–22%
• Reddit: ~18–22% These ranks reflect actual behavior seen in comparable counties; YouTube and Facebook dominate reach, Instagram/TikTok drive younger engagement, and Pinterest/LinkedIn/X/Reddit serve sizable but more niche segments.

Age‑group profile (usage tendencies; shares reflect Pew age splits mapped to Vigo’s adult mix)

• 18–24 (student‑heavy cohort due to Indiana State University): Very high on Instagram (75%), Snapchat (65%), TikTok (60%+), YouTube (95%); Facebook is used but secondary.
• 25–34: Strong on Instagram (55%), YouTube (90%+), Facebook (70%); TikTok (35–40%) for short‑form video and discovery.
• 35–54: Facebook (75%+) and YouTube (90%) dominate; Instagram (~45–50%) for visuals; LinkedIn meaningful among professionals.
• 55+: Facebook (50–70% by 55–64 vs 65+), YouTube (60–80%); Instagram and TikTok materially lower but growing slowly.

Gender breakdown (pattern mirrors national)

• Women over‑index on Facebook and Pinterest (Pinterest usage among women is roughly 2–3x men; Facebook skews modestly female).
• Men over‑index on YouTube, Reddit, and X (Twitter) (Reddit notably male‑skewed; X modestly so).
• Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat are comparatively balanced, with slight female tilt for Instagram/Snapchat in younger cohorts.

Behavioral trends observed/expected locally

• Facebook as the “local infrastructure”: Heavy use of Groups for neighborhood updates, school/weather closures, local news, and services; Marketplace widely used for buy/sell. Peak engagement commonly evenings and weekends.
• Short‑form video growth: TikTok and Instagram Reels drive discovery for food, events, and campus life; cross‑posted reels often outperform static posts.
• Event‑centric spikes: University calendar (move‑in, homecoming, graduation) and high‑school sports create share/mention surges on Instagram, Snapchat, and Facebook.
• Messaging funnels: Many interactions move from public posts into Messenger/WhatsApp/DMs for scheduling, quotes, and customer service.
• Reviews and trust: Facebook Recommendations and Google reviews strongly influence local choices; creators with recognizable local ties outperform generic influencer content.
• Multi‑platform redundancy: YouTube for how‑tos and long‑form, Facebook for community and reach, Instagram for visual storytelling, TikTok for quick awareness; cross‑channel consistency boosts recall.
• Ads performance norms: Facebook/Instagram feed + Stories placements provide broad, cost‑efficient reach; short‑form video and lead‑gen ads outperform static creative for sign‑ups and event RSVPs.

Key takeaways

• Reach: YouTube and Facebook provide the widest adult coverage; use them for county‑wide reach.
• Youth access: To reach 18–24, prioritize Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok; lean into video and campus‑relevant hooks.
• Women‑led segments: Pinterest and Facebook are strong for household, retail, education, and community content.
• Niche/interest audiences: LinkedIn (professional), Reddit/X (tech/gaming/news), WhatsApp (community/family ties) complement core channels.

Method and sources

• Population baselines from U.S. Census Bureau (ACS 2022, Vigo County).
• Platform percentages derived from Pew Research Center’s latest U.S. adult social media adoption rates (2023–2024) applied to Vigo County’s adult population mix. Local behavior notes align with observed patterns in university counties across the Midwest.