Bourbon County

Bourbon County, Kentucky — key demographics

Population

• 20,252 (2020 Census)

Age (ACS 2018–2022)

• Median age: ~41
• Under 18: ~23%
• 65 and over: ~18–19%

Gender (ACS 2018–2022)

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Race/ethnicity (ACS 2018–2022)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~82–84%
• Black or African American: ~8–9%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~4–6%
• Two or more races: ~2–4%
• Asian: ~0.3%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.2%

Households (ACS 2018–2022)

• Total households: ~8,100
• Average household size: ~2.5
• Family households: ~65%
• Married-couple families: ~45–48%
• Households with children under 18: ~28–30%
• One-person households: ~26–28%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~65–67%

Bourbon County, KY snapshot (estimates)

• Email users: About 12.5–13.5k adult users (18+). Method: ~20.5k residents, ~78% adults ≈16k; ~86% use internet; ~92% of internet users use email.
• Age mix among email users:
  • 18–34: ~29%
  • 35–49: ~27%
  • 50–64: ~23%
  • 65+: ~21% (Based on county-like age structure and Pew email adoption by age.)
• Gender split: Roughly 51% female, 49% male (email usage is essentially gender-neutral; mirrors population).
• Digital access trends:
  • Broadband subscription: roughly 80–85% of households report a home broadband plan; 10–15% are smartphone‑only internet users.
  • Urban–rural gap: Highest speeds and subscription levels in/around Paris; outer rural areas rely more on DSL/fixed wireless, with patchier performance.
  • Public access: Libraries and schools provide free Wi‑Fi/computers, important for lower‑income and student users.
  • Trendline: Gradual gains from ongoing regional fiber builds and affordability programs; older adults remain the least connected but are slowly adopting.
• Local density/connectivity facts: Population ~20.5k over ~290 sq. mi. (≈70 residents/sq. mi.). Connectivity is denser along Paris corridors; dispersed farms face longer last‑mile runs, raising costs and lowering speeds.

Sources blended: U.S. Census/ACS, FCC availability, Pew Research on email/internet adoption.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Bourbon County, Kentucky (focus on how it differs from statewide patterns)

Context and scale (modeled estimates; use as planning ranges)

• Population: roughly 20–21k residents; about 15–16k adults.
• Adult smartphone users: about 12.5k–13.5k (assumes 80–86% adult adoption; rural KY tends to be 78–84%, but proximity to Lexington likely nudges Bourbon toward the high end).
• Active mobile lines/SIMs: approximately 23k–26k (about 1.1–1.3 lines per resident when counting phones, tablets, wearables, hotspots).
• Wireless-only for voice (no landline): 70–80% of households, broadly in line with Kentucky’s high wireless-only tendency.
• Smartphone-dependent for home internet (no fixed broadband at home): 12–16% of households—likely a bit lower than Kentucky’s overall rate, because fixed broadband options in Paris and nearby corridors reduce mobile-only reliance.

What looks different from the Kentucky average

• Less “smartphone-only” internet reliance: Thanks to cable/fiber presence in Paris and expanding fiber/DSL upgrades in surrounding areas, Bourbon likely has fewer households relying solely on mobile data than the statewide rural average.
• Better mid-band 5G reach than many rural counties: Spillover from Lexington’s buildouts and T‑Mobile’s mid-band footprint tend to give Bourbon more 5G capacity in and around Paris and along primary corridors than is typical for rural KY, though still below urban counties.
• Fewer severe dead zones than Eastern KY: Terrain in the Bluegrass region is more forgiving than Appalachia; most gaps are in low-lying or far‑edge farm areas rather than broad swaths.
• Commuter effect: Daytime device density rises on routes to/from Fayette County (Lexington), producing time‑of‑day congestion more tied to commuting windows than in many rural counties.

Demographic usage patterns (directional, based on county mix)

• Age:
  • 18–34: near‑universal smartphone ownership (95%+), heavy app/social/video use; high 5G adoption when available.
  • 35–64: 85–92% adoption; more multi‑line households (kids + work lines); frequent use of hotspotting for farm/small‑business tasks.
  • 65+: 65–75% adoption—likely a touch higher than rural KY overall due to better coverage and family support networks close to Lexington; continued use of basic/feature phones persists.
• Income and education:
  • Lower‑income households are more likely to be mobile‑only for internet, but availability of entry‑tier cable/fiber in Paris trims this share vs statewide rural averages.
  • Small farms and trades often combine a primary smartphone with a data hotspot or fixed‑wireless plan, reducing dependence on DSL.
• Race/ethnicity:
  • County is less diverse than Kentucky’s metro hubs; smaller Black and Hispanic shares mean the countywide rate of smartphone‑dependent internet (which is often higher among these groups statewide) is somewhat muted relative to the Kentucky average.

Digital infrastructure notes

• Carriers and coverage:
  • AT&T, Verizon, and T‑Mobile provide countywide LTE; 5G is strongest in and around Paris and along major routes (e.g., US‑68/US‑460), with lower‑band 5G or LTE in outlying farm areas.
  • FirstNet (AT&T) serves public safety; coverage generally tracks AT&T’s LTE/5G footprint.
• 5G capacity:
  • Mid‑band 5G (T‑Mobile n41; Verizon C‑band spilling from Lexington; AT&T mid‑band in limited spots) boosts speeds near population centers; rural edges are more likely on low‑band 5G/LTE.
• Fixed alternatives that shape mobile behavior:
  • Cable/fiber in Paris (and ongoing fiber builds in pockets) lower the share of mobile‑only households compared with many rural KY counties.
  • Fixed‑wireless home internet from mobile carriers (T‑Mobile, Verizon) is available to many addresses; adoption is common on large lots/farms without reliable cable/fiber.
• Coverage constraints and patterns:
  • Tower spacing reflects farmland parcel sizes; most gaps are along creek bottoms and far‑edge parcels rather than countywide shadows.
  • Network load spikes around school commute hours, high‑school events, and weekend youth sports; speeds dip predictably during these peaks.
• Community connectivity assets:
  • Schools and library in Paris offer high‑capacity Wi‑Fi backstopped by E‑Rate fiber; these sites act as informal relief valves for homework and telehealth when mobile capacity dips.

Implications for planning and outreach

• Mobile‑only residents exist but are a smaller share than the statewide rural picture; prioritize outreach in outlying tracts and among lower‑income seniors.
• Capacity, not raw coverage, is the main constraint near Paris during peaks; mid‑band densification or small cells would deliver outsized benefits.
• Fixed‑wireless is an effective complement where fiber isn’t yet present; ensure clear siting for customer premises equipment and line‑of‑sight to sectors serving low‑lying farms.
• Digital literacy for 65+ users can lift effective adoption; many already have devices but underuse telehealth and government services.

Notes and sources to verify locally

• Use FCC National Broadband and Mobile Coverage maps (2024) to spot 5G/LTE and fixed‑wireless footprints by provider.
• Check Kentucky Office of Broadband and provider build plans (e.g., Kinetic/Windstream, Spectrum) for fiber expansion around Paris and rural tracts.
• Compare smartphone‑dependent rates using ACS internet subscription tables and Pew/NTIA trends; apply county demographics to state rates for refined estimates.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot. County-level platform stats aren’t directly published; figures are estimates inferred from recent Pew/national data, rural- Kentucky patterns, and Bourbon County’s demographics (pop. ~21k; adults ~16.5k).

User base (13+)

• Adults using at least one social platform: ~13.2k–14.0k (80–85% of adults)
• Teens (13–17) using social: 1.2k–1.4k (90–95%)
• Total social users (13+): roughly 14.5k–15.4k

Most-used platforms (adults, estimated penetration)

• YouTube: 80–85%
• Facebook: 70–75% (dominant locally; Groups/Marketplace very active)
• Instagram: 35–45%
• TikTok: 25–35% (higher among <35)
• Snapchat: 25–30% (teen/20s-heavy)
• Pinterest: 28–35% (skews female)
• X (Twitter): 18–22%
• LinkedIn: 15–20% (lower in rural labor mix)

Age patterns (platform skew and behavior)

• 13–17: Near-universal YouTube; heavy Snapchat and TikTok; Instagram strong; Facebook minimal except for school/teams. Prefers short vertical video, trends, DMs.
• 18–29: Multi-platform power users. Instagram, TikTok, YouTube lead; Snapchat for messaging; moderate Facebook for events and Marketplace.
• 30–44: Facebook + Messenger central for family, school, youth sports, and Marketplace; YouTube for how-to. Rising Instagram/Reels; light TikTok.
• 45–64: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Pinterest notable (home, recipes, crafts). Less TikTok/Snapchat; Instagram moderate.
• 65+: Facebook first (community info, church, local news); YouTube second; minimal use of TikTok/Snapchat/Instagram.

Gender breakdown (share and skew)

• Users by gender: roughly 52–55% women, 45–48% men (women slightly more active on social overall).
• Women: Over-index on Facebook (incl. Groups), Instagram, Pinterest; high Marketplace usage.
• Men: Over-index on YouTube, X; more sports/news/how-to content.

Behavioral trends in Bourbon County

• Facebook Groups/Marketplace are the local hub: school updates, youth sports, farm/ranch and equipment buy-sell, lost/found pets, city/county notices, church and festival events.
• Short-form video is rising: Reels/TikTok used by local businesses (food, boutiques, services) for promos; strongest with 18–44.
• Messaging-first interactions: Many residents contact small businesses via Facebook Messenger or Instagram DMs.
• YouTube for practical content: DIY, automotive, home/farm maintenance; local streams of school sports and church services.
• Peak engagement windows: Evenings 7–9 pm; weekend mornings for Marketplace/event posts.
• Trust and word-of-mouth: Local recommendations in Groups significantly influence purchases; reviews and neighbor referrals matter more than polished ads.

Notes and caveats

• Figures are directional estimates; actual usage varies by connectivity pockets and specific communities (Paris and surrounding rural areas).
• Broadband gaps mean smartphone-only access is common; vertical, captioned video and lightweight creative tend to perform best.