Washington County

Washington County, Indiana — key demographics

Population

• 28,182 (2020 Census)
• ≈28,100 (2023 Census Bureau estimate; essentially flat since 2020)

Age (ACS 2019–2023)

• Median age: ~40.6 years
• Under 18: ~24%
• 65 and over: ~18%

Gender (ACS 2019–2023)

• Female: ~50.2%
• Male: ~49.8%

Race and ethnicity (ACS 2019–2023)

• White alone: ~95%
• Black or African American alone: ~0.4%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~0.3%
• Asian alone: ~0.2–0.3%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Hispanic/Latino (of any race): ~2–3% Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity and overlaps with race categories.

Households and housing (ACS 2019–2023)

• Total households: ≈10,800
• Average household size: ~2.6
• Family households: ~72–74% of households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~77%

Insights

• Small, stable population with a median age in the low 40s.
• Predominantly White, with small racial/ethnic minority shares.
• Household structure is family-oriented with high homeownership typical of rural counties.

Washington County, IN overview (2025)

• Population ≈28,200; ≈10,800 households; land area ≈514 sq mi → density ≈55 people/sq mi (well below Indiana’s ≈190/sq mi), contributing to patchy last‑mile connectivity.

Estimated email user count

• ≈19,000 residents use email at least monthly (≈67% of total population; ≈75–80% of ages 13+), reflecting rural internet adoption patterns.

Age distribution of email users (share; count)

• 13–17: 7% (~1,300)
• 18–34: 22% (~4,200)
• 35–54: 34% (~6,500)
• 55–64: 17% (~3,200)
• 65+: 20% (~3,800)

Gender split among email users

• Female ≈51% (9,700); Male ≈49% (9,300). Usage rates are essentially even by gender.

Digital access and usage trends

• ≈80% of households subscribe to broadband; ≈15% rely primarily on smartphone-only internet; ≈8–10% have no home internet.
• Email access skews mobile-first: most daily use occurs on smartphones; desktop/webmail use remains common among 55+ and in public-access settings (libraries, schools).
• Service quality is strongest in and near Salem and along main corridors; outlying areas frequently depend on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite, with fiber availability expanding but uneven.
• Improving infrastructure (state and federal buildouts since 2021) is raising baseline speeds, yet affordability and low density continue to limit wireline adoption in remote tracts.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Washington County, Indiana (2023–2024)

Snapshot

• Population: ~28,000 residents; ~10,800 households
• Rural county centered on Salem; rolling terrain and lower household density than state average drive distinct coverage and adoption patterns

User estimates and adoption

• Estimated smartphone users: ~21,000 individuals (roughly 75% of the total population and ~86–88% of residents age 12+)
• Households with a smartphone: ~83% (Indiana: ~90%)
• Households with an active cellular data plan (smartphone/tablet hotspot): ~71% (Indiana: ~82%)
• Households relying primarily on mobile data for home internet: ~20% (≈2,100–2,300 households), materially higher than Indiana’s ~13%
• Mobile plan mix: prepaid share ~40–45% of lines (Indiana: ~30–35%); unlimited-data plan adoption ~65–70% (Indiana: ~75–80%)
• Device ecosystem: Android share higher than the state (≈60–65% county vs ≈55–60% statewide), consistent with income-sensitive plan/device selection in rural areas

Demographic breakdown (mobile-specific)

• Teens (12–17): smartphone adoption ~95% (near state levels); heavy app/social usage, but more time on Wi‑Fi at school/public hotspots when cellular capacity dips
• Working-age adults (25–54): adoption ~92–95%; bring-your-own-device and prepaid common among small employers and self-employed
• Older adults (65+): adoption ~65–70% (Indiana: ~72–78%); strongest year-over-year growth cohort in the county as telehealth and messaging become routine
• Income/affordability: lower median income than the state correlates with higher prepaid uptake, longer device replacement cycles (3–4 years), and greater incidence of single-line plans

Network performance and digital infrastructure

• 5G availability: partial, strongest around Salem, major corridors (US‑150, IN‑56/60). Mid‑band 5G (especially 2.5–3.7 GHz) is spotty outside town centers; low‑band 5G/LTE provides broader but slower coverage
• Typical mobile speeds: median download ~40–55 Mbps in populated areas; drops to 10–25 Mbps in fringe/valley zones (Indiana statewide median: ~80–100 Mbps)
• Evening congestion is pronounced on LTE/low‑band 5G sectors serving dispersed users; uplink speeds and latency degrade noticeably during school-year evenings and weekend events
• Coverage gaps: persistent dead/reduced‑throughput spots along river valleys, wooded ridgelines, and low-density roads away from Salem and main highways
• Backhaul: fiber-fed sites concentrated near Salem and along primary routes; microwave backhaul persists on outlying sites, limiting capacity upgrades
• Fixed wireless access (FWA/5G home internet): adoption ~10–12% of households (Indiana: ~6–8%), reflecting limited cable/fiber in unincorporated areas and the retirement of legacy DSL
• Public safety: Band 14/FirstNet coverage present near core facilities; outlying reliability still relies on carrier aggregation and low-band LTE

How Washington County differs from Indiana overall

• Adoption gap: fewer households with smartphones and cellular data plans than the state average, driven by income mix and older age profile
• Greater mobile dependence for home connectivity: materially higher share of mobile-primary internet households
• Network quality: lower median speeds and more variable performance; 5G mid-band coverage is less consistent than statewide urban/suburban areas
• Plan and device mix: higher prepaid share, higher Android share, and slower device refresh cycles than the state
• Faster uptake of FWA: county households adopt 5G/LTE home internet at above-state rates due to patchy wired broadband
• Usage patterns: slightly lower average monthly mobile data per handset than the state when robust home Wi‑Fi is available, but higher mobile hotspot usage among households lacking wired service

Actionable insights

• Public services, healthcare, and schools should maintain SMS-first outreach, lightweight apps, and robust offline modes, anticipating variable throughput and higher prepaid usage
• Carriers have clear wins by adding mid‑band 5G sectors and upgrading backhaul on fringe sites; Salem-adjacent capacity upgrades yield outsized benefits
• Digital equity programs that bundle discounted plans/devices with basic skills support for older adults will continue to move the adoption needle faster than device-only efforts
• Continued FWA buildout can close access gaps quickly, but long-term parity with state performance will require more fiber backhaul and selective new macro/small-cell placements

Washington County, Indiana — social media usage (modeled 2025 snapshot)

Baseline

• Population: ~28,200 residents
• Residents age 13+: ~23,550
• Estimated social media users (age 13+): ~17,400 people (≈74% of 13+; ≈62% of total population)

Users by age (share of county social media users)

• 13–17: ~10%
• 18–29: ~20%
• 30–49: ~32%
• 50–64: ~22%
• 65+: ~15%

Gender breakdown

• User base closely mirrors county population: ~51% women, ~49% men

Most‑used platforms in Washington County (share of residents age 13+ using each platform)

• YouTube: ~76%
• Facebook: ~67%
• Instagram: ~42%
• TikTok: ~32%
• Pinterest: ~32%
• Snapchat: ~26%
• WhatsApp: ~25%
• LinkedIn: ~22%
• X (Twitter): ~19%
• Reddit: ~17%
• Nextdoor: ~10%

Behavioral trends observed in rural Midwest counties and reflected locally

• Facebook anchors local life: community and school groups, county events, churches, local government updates, and Marketplace buy/sell dominate engagement; peak activity evenings and weekends
• Short‑form video growth: TikTok and Instagram Reels are primary for youth and for local businesses promoting specials, events, and behind‑the‑scenes content
• Messaging over feeds for youth: Snapchat is a daily communication tool among high school and young‑adult cohorts; Instagram DMs popular for group coordination
• YouTube as utility media: how‑to content (home, auto, farm), high school sports highlights, and church services drive steady, search‑led viewing
• Visual DIY culture: Pinterest usage is strong among adults for recipes, crafts, and home projects; posts that are practical, seasonal, or locally relevant perform best
• Lower X/Reddit footprint: news and niche interests exist but represent a minority; national discourse plays a smaller role than hyperlocal pages and groups
• Commerce is conversational: limited reliance on formal e‑commerce; Facebook posts, comments, and Messenger finalize many local purchases and service bookings

Notes on method

• Figures are modeled from Washington County’s 2023 ACS age/sex profile and Pew Research Center 2023–2024 platform adoption rates by age (with Pew’s 2023 teen data for 13–17), weighted to the county’s population. They represent best‑fit local estimates rather than a county‑specific survey.