Casey County

Key demographics for Casey County, Kentucky (latest U.S. Census Bureau data; 2020 Census and ACS 2018–2022 5-year estimates; rounded):

Population size

• 16,225 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

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

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Racial/ethnic composition (alone or in combination; Hispanic is any race)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~94–95%
• Hispanic/Latino: ~2%
• Two or more races: ~2–3%
• Black or African American: ~0.5–1%
• Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, NH/PI: each <0.5%

Household data (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~6,200
• Average household size: ~2.6
• Average family size: ~3.1
• Family households: ~69–70% (nonfamily ~30–31%)
• Households with children under 18: ~30%
• Owner-occupied housing units: ~77–78%

Summary for Casey County, Kentucky (estimates)

• Population and density: ~16,000 residents; rural, ~35–40 people per square mile.
• Estimated email users: 11,000–13,000 residents use email regularly (scaled from national/rural adoption patterns).
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–17: 6–8%
  • 18–34: 25–30%
  • 35–54: 35–40%
  • 55–64: 12–15%
  • 65+: 15–20% (lower adoption than younger adults)
• Gender split: roughly even; about 51% female, 49% male among users.
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband subscription rates trail Kentucky’s average; smartphone-only access is common in outlying areas.
  • Connectivity strongest near Liberty/US‑127 and along primary roads; weaker in sparsely populated ridges and hollows.
  • Fixed wireless and legacy DSL are prevalent outside town; cable/fiber availability is growing but remains spotty.
  • Public Wi‑Fi (library, schools, government sites) and mobile hotspots help bridge gaps.
  • Ongoing state/federal rural broadband initiatives are expected to expand fiber and 5G coverage over the next few years.

Notes: Figures are modeled from 2020 Census population and national email/adoption benchmarks (e.g., Pew and ACS patterns) adjusted for rural Kentucky.

Below is a concise, county-focused picture built from recent rural Kentucky patterns (ACS S2801, Pew mobile adoption, FCC/NTIA coverage indicators) applied to Casey County’s size and demographics. Figures are estimates; verify with the latest ACS 5‑year, Kentucky Broadband Office maps, and carrier coverage tools.

Context

• County profile: ≈16K residents and about 6–7K households; predominantly rural, older than the Kentucky average, and lower median income. County seat: Liberty.

User estimates (round numbers, method: rural adoption rates × Casey County pop/households)

• Mobile phone users (any cellphone): 12,400–13,000 residents
  • Basis: ~93–95% of adults plus most teens own a cellphone in rural areas.
• Smartphone users: 10,800–11,600 residents
  • Basis: ~80–85% of adults in rural counties use smartphones; teen adoption is high.
• Households using mobile as their primary or only home internet: 1,200–1,600 households (≈18–25% of households)
  • Above Kentucky’s typical 12–15%, reflecting sparser wired options.
• Prepaid/budget plans share: materially higher than state average (driven by income mix and coverage variability).

Demographic breakdown (how Casey differs from state-level)

• Age:
  • 18–44: Near-universal smartphone ownership, similar to state.
  • 45–64: Slightly lower smartphone share vs state metro counties; more mixed (smartphone + basic flip).
  • 65+: Noticeably lower smartphone adoption and more voice/text-centric usage than the KY average for seniors; more shared/family devices.
• Income/education:
  • Higher reliance on prepaid and mobile-only internet among lower-income households; device replacement cycles are longer than state average.
• Geography within the county:
  • Liberty and corridors (e.g., US‑127) show stronger, more consistent LTE/5G; hollows/ridges see weaker signal and more carrier variability, leading to multi‑SIM/workaround behavior (hotspots, signal boosters).

Digital infrastructure points (county realities vs Kentucky at large)

• Access mix:
  • 4G LTE is the day-to-day workhorse in much of the county; 5G low‑band is present mainly in/near Liberty and along primary roads. Mid‑band 5G capacity is limited compared with urban KY.
  • Because cable/fiber footprints are patchier than in cities, cellular is a more common backup or primary link for home and small business connectivity.
• Performance:
  • Typical cellular speeds in many areas are serviceable but trail urban KY; peaks occur near town, with noticeable slowdowns at the edges and inside hollows.
  • Data caps and deprioritization shape behavior (more Wi‑Fi offload where available, conservative video streaming).
• Providers/coverage patterns:
  • AT&T and Verizon tend to offer the broadest rural reach; T‑Mobile’s low‑band 5G has expanded but can be inconsistent off main routes. Residents often pick carriers by specific‑location performance rather than price alone.
• Backhaul and redundancy:
  • Fewer fiber backhaul routes than urban KY; outages or congestion can have outsized local impact. Fixed‑wireless ISPs fill some gaps but with variable quality.
• Public safety and agriculture:
  • FirstNet and farm/enterprise IoT rely heavily on low‑band coverage; terrain still creates known dead zones that local agencies and farms mitigate with boosters and external antennas.

Usage trends that diverge from Kentucky’s statewide pattern

• Greater mobile-only reliance: A larger share of households and small businesses use cellular as their primary internet.
• Slower 5G transition: 4G LTE remains dominant longer; mid‑band 5G capacity is less prevalent than in Louisville/Lexington/NKY.
• Budget-conscious plans: Higher prepaid adoption and longer device lifecycles; more BYOD and refurbished devices than state urban averages.
• Voice/text resiliency: Calling and SMS alerts retain higher importance for day‑to‑day and emergency communication; social/video use is more constrained by data allowances and coverage.
• Location-based carrier choice: Residents are more likely to switch or maintain multiple lines/hotspots to cope with spotty terrain-based coverage, a behavior less common in well‑served metro areas.

How to refine/verify locally

• Pull ACS 2019–2023 5‑year S2801 for Casey County (smartphone, cellular data plan, and broadband by income/age).
• Check Kentucky Broadband Office and FCC mobile maps for 4G/5G by carrier; compare with crowdsourced apps (e.g., Ookla, CellMapper) for on-the-ground performance.
• Engage local schools, EMS, and farm co‑ops for practical coverage gaps and hotspot usage rates.

Below is an estimate-based snapshot. County-level social media data aren’t directly published, so figures apply national/rural Kentucky patterns (Pew Research Center 2023–2024) to Casey County’s size and age mix.

Headline stats

• Population: ~16–16.5k residents; adults (18+): ~12–13k.
• Estimated social media users: ~9–11k total (about 55–65% of residents; ~70–75% of adults).
• Device mix: Mobile-first; Facebook Messenger and SMS are primary for communication.

Most‑used platforms (share of social media users in the county; rounded ranges)

• YouTube: ~75–85%
• Facebook: ~70–80%
• Facebook Messenger: ~65–75%
• Instagram: ~35–45%
• TikTok: ~30–40%
• Snapchat: ~25–35% (but 60–80% among teens/college-age)
• Pinterest: ~25–35% (skews female)
• X/Twitter: ~10–15%
• LinkedIn: ~8–12% Note: YouTube and Facebook lead across all ages; Instagram/TikTok concentrate in under‑35s.

Age group patterns (who uses what)

• Teens (13–17): Very high YouTube (>90%); strong TikTok and Snapchat (60–70%+); Instagram common; Facebook limited aside from school/team pages.
• 18–29: YouTube (85–90%); Instagram (65–75%); TikTok (55–65%); Facebook (60–70%); Snapchat (40–50%).
• 30–49: Facebook (75–85%) and YouTube (75–85%) dominate; Instagram (40–50%); TikTok (30–40%); Pinterest strong among women.
• 50–64: Facebook (70–80%); YouTube (65–75%); Instagram (20–30%); TikTok (15–25%).
• 65+: Facebook (65–75%); YouTube (50–60%); minimal on other platforms.

Gender breakdown

• Users are roughly even by gender (slight female majority consistent with county demographics).
• Women: Over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; slightly higher TikTok usage than men.
• Men: Over-index on YouTube; more likely to use X/Reddit (still small bases).

Behavioral trends

• Community-first Facebook: Heavy reliance on Facebook Groups and Pages for schools, churches, youth sports, local government/EMS updates, and buy‑sell‑trade. Facebook Marketplace is a top local commerce channel.
• Video for DIY and work: YouTube used for how‑to (home repair, farming, auto, small engine), sermons, sports highlights; growing smart‑TV viewing at home.
• Youth messaging ecosystems: Snapchat as daily messaging for teens/young adults; Instagram DMs common; group chats organize school, sports, and church activities.
• Short‑form discovery: TikTok and Instagram Reels drive local trend discovery, small-business promotion (boutiques, salons, food trucks), and seasonal events.
• Local news and alerts: Many adults get local news primarily via Facebook; county/school announcements see strong engagement. Word‑of‑mouth amplification is common.
• Timing and content: Highest engagement evenings and weekends; authentic, people‑focused photos/videos outperform polished creative; giveaways and tangible value offers see strong response.
• Coverage constraints: Patchy broadband in parts of the county; mobile data limits can reduce long HD streaming outside Wi‑Fi zones.

Method note

• Estimates derived from Pew Research Center social media adoption (2023–2024), rural vs. urban usage gaps, and Casey County demographic proportions from recent ACS/Census data. Use locally observed page/group metrics to refine these ranges for campaigns.