Buchanan County

Here are current, high-level demographics for Buchanan County, Iowa (latest U.S. Census Bureau data; primarily 2019–2023 ACS 5-year estimates; population baseline from 2020 Census). Figures are rounded.

• Population

  • Total: about 21,000 residents (2020 Census ~21.2k; 2023 ACS estimate ~20.9k)

• Age

  • Median age: ~40–41 years
  • Under 18: ~24%
  • 18–64: ~59%
  • 65 and over: ~17%

• Sex

  • Male: ~50%
  • Female: ~50%

• Race/ethnicity (any race)

  • White, non-Hispanic: ~94–95%
  • Hispanic/Latino: ~2–3%
  • Black/African American: ~1%
  • Two or more races: ~2–3%
  • Asian: ~0.3%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.2%

• Households and families

  • Total households: ~8,300
  • Average household size: ~2.5
  • Family households: ~66%
  • Married-couple families: ~55%
  • Households with children under 18: ~29%
  • One-person households: ~27%
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: ~78%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2019–2023 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census for population baseline.

Buchanan County, IA (pop. ≈20–21k; low density ≈35–40 people/sq. mi.) has widespread email adoption typical of rural Iowa.

Estimated email users

• 15,000–17,000 residents use email regularly (driven by high adult internet adoption plus teen accounts).

Age distribution of email users (approx.)

• 18–34: 27–30%
• 35–64: 50–55%
• 65+: 18–22% (usage strong but below younger groups)

Gender split

• Roughly even (≈50/50), with negligible difference in usage.

Digital access and trends

• Most households in towns (e.g., Independence, Jesup) have cable/fiber; rural areas rely more on DSL, fixed wireless, or mobile.
• FCC/ACS-style indicators suggest the majority of homes have 100/20 Mbps options, but gaps persist in sparsely populated townships; about 10–15% of households may lack home broadband and depend on smartphones or public/library Wi‑Fi.
• Smartphone adoption is high; “smartphone‑only” internet households are growing, especially outside town centers.
• Public institutions (schools, libraries) serve as key access points and digital-skills hubs.

Overall, email penetration is near-universal among working-age adults, slightly lower among seniors, with connectivity strongest in town centers and patchier in outlying farm and acreage areas.

Mobile phone usage in Buchanan County, Iowa — summary focused on where it differs from the state

At‑a‑glance user estimates

• Adult population: roughly 16,000–17,000 (out of ~21,000 total residents).
• Smartphone users: about 13,500–14,500 adults (≈82–88% adoption). This runs a few points lower than Iowa overall (≈88–90%).
• Basic/feature‑phone users: about 1,200–1,800 adults (≈7–11%), a bit higher than the state share.
• Households relying primarily on mobile data for home internet: approximately 20–25% versus about 15–18% statewide. Reliance is notably higher outside Independence/Jesup.
• Prepaid/MVNO lines: likely a larger share than the Iowa average, driven by price sensitivity and the winding‑down of the federal ACP benefit in 2024.

Demographic patterns (how Buchanan County differs)

• Age: Higher share of older adults than the state average; smartphone ownership among 65+ is lower (roughly 60–70%), pulling down overall penetration. Younger cohorts (18–34) are near universal adoption (>90%).
• Income: Median household income trails the statewide median slightly; lower‑income households here show higher “mobile‑only” internet reliance and greater use of prepaid plans.
• Urban/rural split: In‑town residents (Independence, Jesup, Fairbank area) are more likely to have fixed broadband and use mobile as a complement; residents on farms and in smaller towns use mobile as a primary connection more often than the state average.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Carrier coverage: All three national carriers have countywide LTE; 5G is present but is mostly low‑band outside towns. Mid‑band 5G (faster) is spotty, concentrated near Independence, Jesup, and along US‑20. Expect larger dead zones on secondary roads and in low‑lying or wooded areas, though Iowa’s topography limits extreme shadowing.
• Speeds (typical, not guaranteed): LTE often 5–30 Mbps in rural tracts; 5G low‑band around 50–100 Mbps where signal is strong; mid‑band 5G (where available) can exceed 100 Mbps. Variability is higher than in metro Iowa.
• Tower density: Lower than state urban averages; sites cluster near Independence, Jesup, and the US‑20/IA‑150 corridors. Indoor coverage can be challenging in metal‑sided homes, outbuildings, and large agricultural structures.
• Network load: Noticeable peak‑time slowdowns around schools, events, and fairgrounds compared with baseline rural usage, due to fewer sectors per site than in metro counties.
• Public safety/FirstNet: Coverage is present countywide but, like consumer networks, is strongest near population centers and major corridors.

Usage behaviors that diverge from Iowa statewide

• Higher mobile‑as‑primary internet use and hotspotting, especially in areas without cable/fiber. This elevates cellular data consumption per line compared to the state average.
• Slightly lower smartphone penetration overall due to age structure, but a higher proportion of budget/prepaid plans and basic phones among seniors.
• Greater dependence on coverage along commuting and farm‑to‑market routes (US‑20, IA‑150), with residents more likely to switch carriers based on local tower performance than brand features.
• App ecosystem usage skews practical: ag/telematics, school communications, weather/radar, and navigation see above‑average engagement; rideshare/food delivery and micromobility apps see below‑average use due to limited local availability.

Notes on method and uncertainty

• Figures are county‑level estimates synthesized from recent Census/ACS population structure, Pew Research mobile adoption rates, and rural vs. urban differentials observed in Iowa FCC coverage data and industry speed tests. They are intended as planning ranges; exact adoption and performance vary by carrier, handset, and micro‑location. For site‑specific decisions, consult the latest FCC Broadband Data Collection maps and carrier coverage tools, and test SIMs where service is critical.

Below is a concise, best-available estimate for Buchanan County, IA. Exact county-level social media metrics aren’t publicly reported by platforms; figures are modeled from ACS population, rural Iowa broadband adoption, and Pew Research’s 2023–2024 U.S. usage by age and platform.

Headline size and access

• Population: ~20.5K (county). People 13+: ~17.5K.
• Estimated social media users (13+): ~13.5K–15K (roughly 75–85% of 13+ population), reflecting high teen adoption and lower uptake among seniors.
• Broadband/smartphone context: Household broadband in rural Iowa is typically ~80–85%; mobile access further boosts social use.

Age mix (share of social media users; rounded)

• 13–17: ~8–10% (near-universal teen use; heavy YouTube, Snapchat, TikTok)
• 18–29: ~18–22% (near-universal; Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Snapchat)
• 30–49: ~28–34% (very high use; Facebook, YouTube, Instagram; rising Reels/Shorts)
• 50–64: ~22–26% (strong but lower than younger cohorts; Facebook, YouTube, Pinterest)
• 65+: ~14–18% (selective use; primarily Facebook and YouTube)

Gender breakdown (of social media users; modeled)

• Female: ~52–55%
• Male: ~45–48% Notes: Women over-index on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest; men slightly over-index on YouTube, X (Twitter), Reddit.

Most-used platforms in the county (share of social media users; approximate)

• YouTube: ~80–85%
• Facebook: ~65–70% (dominant local community hub)
• Instagram: ~40–50%
• TikTok: ~30–35% (younger skew; growing among 30–49)
• Snapchat: ~30–35% (very strong among teens/20s)
• Pinterest: ~30–35% (notably women 25–54)
• X (Twitter): ~15–25% (news/sports followers)
• LinkedIn: ~15–25% (lower in rural labor mix)
• WhatsApp: ~10–20% (family/intl ties)
• Nextdoor: ~5–10% (limited footprint in small towns)

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook = the local noticeboard: school sports, county fair, church/4‑H, fundraisers, obituaries, storm/road updates, buy/sell/trade groups. Events and community pages see the highest engagement. Evenings and early mornings perform best.
• Video-first consumption: Facebook Reels and YouTube Shorts perform well for local businesses, DIY, ag equipment tips, home services, recipes, hunting/outdoors.
• Messaging > feeds for youth: Snapchat (teens/college) and Facebook Messenger (adults) drive private sharing and coordination.
• Seasonal spikes: County fair, harvest, back-to-school, high school sports playoffs, severe weather days.
• Commerce: Facebook Marketplace and local buy/sell groups are heavily used; Pinterest and Instagram influence home, food, and seasonal shopping decisions among women 25–54.
• Older adults: Primarily Facebook (groups/pages) and YouTube; respond to clear local relevance and trusted organizations.
• Younger adults/teens: TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram for entertainment, trends, and peer updates; local sports highlights and short-form video perform best.

Notes on method/sources

• Population base: U.S. Census/ACS for Buchanan County; broadband context from ACS/FCC rural Iowa.
• Platform and age adoption: Pew Research Center (2023 teens; 2024 U.S. adults by platform/age).
• Figures are modeled to a rural Iowa county profile; for precise counts, use platform ad tools geotargeted to Independence, Jesup and surrounding ZIPs.