Carlisle County

Key demographics — Carlisle County, Kentucky

• Population: 4,826 (2020 Census)
• Age:
  • Median age: ~44 years
  • Under 18: ~22%
  • 65 and over: ~23%
• Gender: Female ~50.7%; Male ~49.3%
• Race/ethnicity (shares of total population):
  • White, non-Hispanic: ~92.8%
  • Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~2.7%
  • Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~3.0%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~1.5%
• Households:
  • Total households: ~2,020
  • Average household size: ~2.35
  • Family households: ~66% of households
  • Married-couple households: ~51%
  • Nonfamily households: ~34%

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

Carlisle County, KY — email usage snapshot (estimates)

• Population and density: ≈4,800 residents; about 25 people per square mile in a largely rural area.
• Estimated email users: ≈3,400 adult users; ≈3,600 including teens.
• Age distribution and adoption:
  • Under 18: ~22% of population; many have school‑issued accounts (roughly 70–80% use).
  • Ages 18–64: 56%; high adoption (90%+ use email).
  • Ages 65+: 22%; moderate‑high adoption (80–85% use), with lower daily use.
• Gender split: Roughly 49% male, 51% female among users (mirrors population; minimal gender gap in email use).
• Digital access trends:
  • Broadband subscription: ~75–80% of households (below urban Kentucky averages).
  • Smartphone‑only internet: ~15–20% of adults, higher in lower‑income and older households.
  • Connectivity context: Low density raises per‑mile build costs; some pockets still rely on DSL/fixed wireless. Fiber coverage is expanding via state/federal programs, while public Wi‑Fi (libraries, schools) remains important for access.

Notes: Figures are derived by applying Kentucky/national internet and email adoption rates (ACS/Pew) to Carlisle County’s population and age mix; treat as directional estimates rather than precise counts.

Below is a practical, data‑informed snapshot of mobile phone usage in Carlisle County, Kentucky, with estimates, demographic patterns, and digital‑infrastructure notes. Where precise local figures are unavailable, I model county metrics from ACS 5‑year patterns for rural Kentucky counties, Pew mobile adoption by age/income, and Carlisle’s population profile. Emphasis is on how Carlisle differs from Kentucky overall.

Quick profile

• Population and households: ~4,700–4,900 residents; ~1,950–2,050 households; older age structure and lower median income than the state average.
• Settlement: Bardwell/Arlington as the population core; extensive farmland and low-density areas elsewhere.

User estimates

• Unique mobile phone users (any mobile): ~3,700–4,100 people, central estimate ~3,900. That’s roughly 80–85% of total residents and about 90–93% of residents age 12+.
• Smartphone users: ~3,100–3,400 people (roughly 65–72% of total residents; ~75–82% of residents age 12+).
• Household smartphone adoption: ~80–85% of households have at least one smartphone (statewide Kentucky is closer to upper‑80s to ~90%).
• Smartphone‑only internet households (no fixed broadband at home): ~16–22% in Carlisle vs ~11–15% statewide. This reflects limited wired options and cost sensitivity.
• Plan mix: Prepaid share materially higher than the state average (est. 30–40% of lines vs ~20–25% statewide), with more single‑line accounts and fewer premium unlimited plans.
• Post‑ACP impacts: With the Affordable Connectivity Program winding down in 2024, low‑income households in Carlisle are more likely to have reduced data tiers, intermittent service, or carrier churn than the state average.

Demographic breakdown (usage patterns and gaps)

• Age
  • 18–49: Near‑universal mobile ownership; smartphone penetration ~90–95%. Usage resembles statewide norms for messaging, social, and navigation.
  • 50–64: High mobile ownership; smartphone penetration ~75–85% (a few points below statewide). More budget Android devices; slower upgrade cycles.
  • 65+: Mobile ownership is high but smartphone penetration lags (roughly 55–65% vs Kentucky’s ~60–70%). Greater reliance on voice/SMS; rising but still modest telehealth and banking app use.
  • Teens: High smartphone adoption, but data constraints more common; heavier Wi‑Fi dependence at school/library.
• Income and education
  • Lower‑income households show higher “smartphone‑only” reliance and prepaid usage. Data caps shape behavior (music streaming over video; downloads on Wi‑Fi).
  • Device life is stretched longer than the state average; screen/battery repairs more common than upgrades.
• Race/ethnicity
  • The county’s population is predominantly White; sample sizes for other groups are small. Local digital divide patterns are driven more by income, age, and geography than by race/ethnicity.
• Geography within the county
  • Town centers (Bardwell/Arlington) have stronger and more consistent LTE/low‑band 5G. Outlying farm roads and bottomlands see coverage drop‑offs, especially indoors.

Digital infrastructure points

• Carriers and coverage
  • AT&T and Verizon provide the most consistent rural coverage; T‑Mobile’s extended‑range 5G has improved but remains spottier off main corridors.
  • 4G LTE is still the workhorse. Low‑band 5G is present on major routes, but mid‑band 5G (for higher speeds) is limited relative to state metros.
  • Typical outdoor speeds: roughly 5–40 Mbps LTE/low‑band 5G in town centers; slower and more variable in fringe areas. Indoor attenuation is a frequent complaint in metal‑roof homes and farm buildings.
• Tower density and backhaul
  • Expect roughly 6–10 macro sites serving or immediately adjacent to the county, with coverage also “bleeding in” from towers in neighboring counties. Distance between sites and terrain can create dead zones.
  • Backhaul is a mix of microwave and fiber. State and federal investments in middle‑mile fiber (e.g., along state routes and into public facilities) help, but not all cell sites have robust fiber backhaul yet—constraining capacity.
• Public and institutional connectivity
  • Schools, libraries, and county buildings typically offer stronger Wi‑Fi that residents use to offload data. This offloading is more prevalent than in urban parts of Kentucky.
• Reliability/resilience
  • Weather and power events can create localized outages; households are more likely to use signal boosters or hot‑spot devices as workarounds than the state average.

How Carlisle differs from Kentucky overall (key trends)

• Lower smartphone penetration: Carlisle trails the statewide household smartphone rate by an estimated 5–8 percentage points, largely due to age and income profile.
• More smartphone‑only households: Reliance on cellular data in lieu of home broadband is higher by roughly 3–7 points than the Kentucky average.
• Heavier prepaid usage and cost sensitivity: Larger share of prepaid and budget plans; data caps shape daily behavior more than in urban Kentucky.
• Slower device refresh and fewer premium devices: Longer upgrade cycles; fewer flagship phones; more repair/replace decisions driven by necessity.
• Network capability gap: Coverage is broad but thin—LTE/low‑band 5G dominate; mid‑band 5G capacity and indoor performance lag urban counties. Average speeds are lower and less consistent.
• Usage mix: More voice/SMS and Facebook‑centric communication; comparatively less high‑definition video streaming and cloud gaming. Telehealth usage is rising but constrained by data/coverage in outlying areas.
• Carrier concentration: Households are more likely to stick with the one carrier that “works at home,” reducing competition and plan flexibility compared with statewide markets.

What this means for planning and outreach

• Outreach that assumes ubiquitous mid‑band 5G or unlimited data will overestimate local capacity; plan for offline access and low‑bandwidth options.
• Programs replacing ACP benefits or bundling fixed‑mobile offerings will have outsized impact; so will device‑upgrade subsidies for older adults.
• Any new middle‑mile fiber or small‑cell deployments on town corridors will disproportionately improve mobile experience countywide by feeding nearby macro sites with better backhaul.

Assumptions and method notes

• Population and household counts from recent estimates for small rural Kentucky counties; adoption rates modeled from ACS S2801‑style indicators at rural‑county scale, Pew Research smartphone ownership by age/income, and Kentucky rural/urban gaps. Ranges reflect uncertainty at small‑area levels and on‑the‑ground variability in coverage and device mix.

Carlisle County, KY — social media snapshot (estimates)

Headline user stats

• Adult social-media users: ~2.4–2.9K people (about 65–75% of adults; small rural county with an older age profile)
• Internet access context: home broadband ~70–75% of households; 20–25% are smartphone‑only users (typical rural pattern), which favors short video and lightweight posts

Age mix of active users (share of local social users; est.)

• 13–17: 8–10% (heavy on Snapchat/TikTok; low Facebook posting, but parents tag them)
• 18–29: 15–18%
• 30–49: 30–34% (largest slice; parents and working professionals)
• 50–64: 25–28%
• 65+: 15–20% (very active on Facebook, groups, Messenger)

Gender breakdown (est.)

• Female: 52–56% of active users (higher engagement in Facebook groups, Pinterest)
• Male: 44–48% (higher on YouTube; sports, how‑to, farm/mechanic content)

Most‑used platforms (adults; estimated penetration)

• Facebook: 65–70% use; 50–55% daily. Dominant for local news, school sports, church/community events, Marketplace.
• YouTube: 65–75% use; 60–70% weekly. How‑to, farming/outdoors, local sports highlights, sermons.
• Facebook Messenger: 55–65% use. Primary DM channel for local businesses and community contacts.
• Instagram: 25–35% use; 15–20% daily. Younger adults and moms; Reels consumption growing.
• TikTok: 20–30% use; 15–20% daily. Strong under‑30; local food, sports, “day in the life,” ag/rural humor.
• Also present (smaller): Pinterest 18–25% (women 25–54), Snapchat 12–18% of adults but 60–70% of teens, X/Twitter 5–10%, LinkedIn 8–12%, Reddit 3–6%, Nextdoor <5%.

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook Groups rule: school/booster clubs, churches, buy‑sell‑trade, yard sales, local alerts. Shares/comments drive reach more than follows.
• Marketplace reliance: local pickup is preferred; posts with clear photos, price, and location perform best.
• Video preferences: short, captioned, vertical clips; many users on variable rural bandwidth. YouTube for longer how‑to and equipment reviews.
• Timing: engagement peaks evenings (7–10 pm), lunch (11:30 am–1 pm), and Sun afternoons; big spikes around high‑school sports, severe weather, county fairs.
• Messaging > forms: people DM first (Messenger/Instagram), then call/text. Quick replies are expected.
• Trust cues: local faces, plain‑spoken copy, community tie‑ins, and visible social proof (comments from neighbors) outperform polished “big brand” creative.
• Content themes that land: school sports highlights, church and civic events, farm/ranch life, local deals, hunting/fishing, seasonal/harvest, road/utility updates.

Notes on methodology

• County‑level social metrics aren’t directly published. Figures are directional estimates triangulated from Pew Research Center’s 2024 social media findings, rural Kentucky adoption patterns (ACS/FCC), platform advertising reach tools, and the county’s older age mix. Treat ranges as planning guidance rather than precise counts.