Ballard County

Key demographics — Ballard County, Kentucky Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 ACS 5-year estimates). Values rounded.

• Population size: ~7,6–7,8k (2020 Census ~7.6k; 2018–2022 ACS estimate ~7.7k)
• Age:
  • Median age: ~45 years
  • Under 18: ~20%
  • 18–64: ~58%
  • 65 and over: ~22%
• Gender:
  • Female: ~51%
  • Male: ~49%
• Race and ethnicity (ACS):
  • White alone: ~93–94%
  • Black or African American alone: ~3–4%
  • Two or more races: ~2–3%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, NH/PI: each ~<1%
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~1–2%
• Households (ACS):
  • Total households: ~3,100
  • Average household size: ~2.3
  • Family households: ~66% of households (married-couple ~50%+)
  • Households with children under 18: ~24–26%
  • One-person households: ~28–30% (65+ living alone ~13–15%)

Overview (Ballard County, KY)

• Population: 7,000; low density (25–30 people/sq mi). Rural settlement patterns and river-bottom terrain create patchy connectivity outside towns.

Estimated email users: ~5,300 (about 75% of residents; ~90% of adults), based on ACS population mix and national email adoption (Pew).

Age distribution of email users (approx.):

• 13–17: 300–350
• 18–34: 1,100–1,200
• 35–64: 2,300–2,400
• 65+: 1,300–1,400 Use skews to working-age adults; seniors participate but at lower rates.

Gender split:

• Roughly even (about 2,650 women, 2,650 men). Any differences are minor and driven by age; older women slightly more likely to be regular users than older men.

Digital access trends:

• 75–80% of households likely have a broadband subscription; 10–15% rely on smartphone-only service; ~15–20% lack home internet.
• Best fixed options in/near Wickliffe and La Center (cable/DSL; limited fiber expanding via Kentucky broadband grants since 2021).
• Mobile coverage strongest along US‑60/US‑51 corridors; weaker in sparsely populated and low-lying areas.

Implication: Email is near-universal among working-age adults; outreach should include mobile-friendly formatting and offline alternatives for households without reliable broadband.

Below is a county-level snapshot built from recent national/state benchmarks (Pew/NTIA/FCC) adjusted to Ballard County’s rural, older, lower-density profile. Figures are estimates with ranges; use them for planning, not regulatory reporting.

Headline estimates for Ballard County

• Population basis used: ~7,600–8,000 residents, with a relatively high share age 65+.
• Total mobile phone users (any handset): ~6,000–6,600 people.
• Smartphone users: ~5,100–5,600 people.
• Households that are mobile‑only for home internet: ~700–900 households (roughly 22–28% of ~3,000–3,300 households).
• Prepaid share of mobile lines: higher than state average, roughly 35–45% of lines (vs. closer to ~30% statewide).

Demographic breakdown (how Ballard differs from Kentucky overall)

• Age:
  • Ballard skews older (median age higher than KY). Expect smartphone adoption to be:
    • 18–34: very high (≈90–95%), similar to state.
    • 35–64: slightly lower than state (≈80–88%).
    • 65+: materially lower than state urban counties (≈55–65%), with more basic/flip phones and shared family plans.
  • Practical effect: overall smartphone penetration a few points below Kentucky’s average, and more voice‑first usage among seniors.
• Income and plan type:
  • Lower median household income than KY overall correlates with:
    • More prepaid plans and BYOD, fewer premium postpaid family bundles.
    • Longer device replacement cycles (4–5+ years common).
    • Higher likelihood of relying on a single handset for both voice and home internet data.
• Race/ethnicity:
  • County is less diverse than KY overall. After controlling for age/income, usage differences by race are small; the bigger drivers locally are age, income, and coverage.

Usage patterns and behaviors

• Calling and text remain comparatively important among older residents; app‑centric use (video/social/gaming) is concentrated among younger adults and teens.
• Mobile‑only internet is more prevalent than statewide, especially in households without access to affordable wired broadband plans.
• Peak‑hour slowdowns are more noticeable than in urban KY due to fewer sectors per tower and limited mid‑band 5G capacity.

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• Coverage profile:
  • 4G LTE: broadly available along primary corridors and towns; pockets of weak or no signal persist in low‑lying river bottoms and heavily wooded areas.
  • 5G: mainly low‑band coverage along highways and around population centers; mid‑band (high‑capacity) 5G is sparse compared with Kentucky’s metro counties. No mmWave.
• Capacity and speeds (typical, not guaranteed):
  • LTE: often 10–40 Mbps down in town/corridors; drops at cell edges.
  • 5G low‑band: roughly 25–100 Mbps where signal is strong; upload often single‑digit Mbps.
  • Evening congestion is common because towers carry both phone traffic and home‑internet hotspot use.
• Towers and backhaul:
  • Lower tower density than state average; macro sites dominate. Limited small‑cell deployment.
  • Where fiber backhaul reaches towers (near towns), performance is noticeably better; elsewhere, microwave backhaul can cap capacity.
• Carriers and public safety:
  • AT&T/Verizon typically strongest in rural western KY; T‑Mobile present but more variable off main routes. FirstNet (AT&T) is the primary public‑safety network; highway coverage is generally stronger than interior farmland/river bottoms.

Key ways Ballard County differs from Kentucky overall

• Lower overall smartphone penetration driven by older age structure.
• Higher reliance on prepaid plans and mobile‑only home internet.
• Sparser mid‑band 5G and fewer sites per square mile, leading to more frequent congestion and wider speed variability.
• Longer device replacement cycles and more basic‑phone use among seniors.
• Greater sensitivity to coverage gaps caused by terrain (river bottoms/forested areas) vs. Kentucky’s urban counties.

Below is a concise, evidence-based snapshot. Exact, Ballard-specific platform data isn’t published; figures are estimates using 2020 Census population (~7,700 residents; ≈6,000 adults) and Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S./rural benchmarks applied to a rural Kentucky county.

Estimated adult reach by platform (share of adults)

• Facebook: ~60–70%
• YouTube: ~75–85%
• Instagram: ~25–35%
• TikTok: ~20–30%
• Snapchat: ~20–25%
• Pinterest: ~30–35% (skews female)
• X/Twitter: ~15–20%
• WhatsApp: ~15–20%
• Nextdoor: ~5–10% (low in sparsely populated areas)

Age patterns (adult focus; teens noted separately)

• 18–29: Heavy Instagram/Snapchat/TikTok; lighter on Facebook. YouTube nearly universal.
• 30–49: Facebook + YouTube dominant; Instagram moderate; TikTok growing but mixed.
• 50–64: Facebook + YouTube strong; Instagram/TikTok lower but rising.
• 65+: Facebook is the primary network; YouTube moderate; limited use of others.
• Teens (national benchmark): YouTube ~95%, TikTok ~60–70%, Snapchat ~55–65%, Instagram ~55–60%, Facebook low.

Gender tendencies

• Women: Higher Facebook and Pinterest use; strong participation in community groups, school/church pages, Marketplace.
• Men: Higher YouTube (how‑to, sports, outdoor content); more likely to use Reddit/X, though overall X use remains small.

Local behavioral trends (rural KY patterns applied to Ballard)

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, school sports, churches, county/sheriff/emergency management, and Marketplace (buy/sell farm gear, vehicles, yard sales).
• Video-first habits: YouTube for tutorials, repairs, hunting/fishing, and high‑school sports replays; short-form TikTok/Reels adoption among under‑40s.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger dominates; SMS remains strong; WhatsApp niche.
• Timing: Evenings and weekends see the highest engagement; quick morning/lunch check-ins are common.
• Trust and discovery: Word‑of‑mouth via Facebook Groups and shares; strong preference for content from known locals and organizations over polished ads.
• Geography matters: Targeted content within 10–25 miles of La Center/Barlow/Wickliffe performs best; Nextdoor penetration is limited due to low neighborhood density.

Approximate user counts (adults), to size the market

• Facebook: ~3,600–4,200 adults
• YouTube: ~4,500–5,100 adults
• Instagram: ~1,500–2,100 adults
• TikTok: ~1,200–1,800 adults
• Snapchat: ~1,200–1,500 adults Note: Ranges reflect uncertainty and rural adjustments to national averages.

Sources/method: 2020 U.S. Census (population base); Pew Research Center 2023–2024 reports on U.S. social media use (including rural vs. urban patterns and age/gender splits).