Cumberland County

I can provide the latest official figures (U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2019–2023 5-year). Do you want those, or would you prefer 2020 Decennial Census figures?

Cumberland County, KY email usage (estimates)

• Users: ≈5,300–5,700 regular email users out of ≈6,700 residents (roughly 80–85%), based on Pew U.S. email adoption rates applied to local age mix.

• Age distribution of email users:

  • Under 18: ~12–15%
  • 18–34: ~20–22%
  • 35–54: ~32–35%
  • 55–64: ~16–18%
  • 65+: ~18–20% Older adults participate slightly less than prime-working-age groups, but usage remains substantial.

• Gender split: Population is roughly 51% female / 49% male; email adoption is nearly even by gender (nationally a ≤2-pt difference).

• Digital access trends:

  • Household broadband subscription likely ~70–75% (in line with rural Kentucky ACS figures), with a notable cellular-only segment (≈10–15%).
  • Email is frequently accessed via smartphones; public Wi‑Fi (library, schools, civic buildings) remains important for those without home broadband.
  • Gradual fiber buildouts in town centers; outlying areas more reliant on DSL/fixed wireless, which can limit reliability and speeds.

• Local density/connectivity context:

  • Very low population density (~22 residents per square mile) and hilly terrain increase last‑mile costs, contributing to patchier wired broadband than state averages—key factors shaping email access patterns.

Sources: U.S. Census/ACS (population, broadband), Pew Research Center (email adoption by age/gender).

Summary of mobile phone usage in Cumberland County, Kentucky (estimates and key differences vs state)

Overall usage and adoption (adult population-based estimates)

• Adult population baseline: roughly 5,200–5,500 adults in a total population near 6,700–7,000.
• Any mobile phone ownership: about 88–92% of adults (≈4,600–5,000 users). Slightly below Kentucky’s statewide level, which is close to the U.S. average (~90%+).
• Smartphone ownership: about 72–80% of adults (≈3,800–4,400 users). This trails the statewide average (roughly mid‑80s) due to older age structure, lower incomes, and patchier coverage.
• Wireless‑only (no landline) households: about 60–70% locally vs ~70–75% statewide. Cumberland County’s older population keeps landlines more than the state average.
• Households relying primarily on cellular data for home internet: about 18–25% locally vs ~12–16% statewide, reflecting more limited fixed broadband options outside Burkesville.
• No‑home‑internet households: about 18–22% locally vs ~12–14% statewide; mobile phones often fill basic connectivity gaps (calls, messaging, light apps) even where home internet is absent.

Demographic patterns that shape usage

• Age: Smartphone adoption among 65+ likely in the 50–60% range (vs ~65–70% statewide). Basic‑phone retention is notably higher among older residents; caregivers often supply shared smartphones for telehealth and messaging.
• Income: Below‑median household incomes increase prepaid plan usage and data‑cap sensitivity. More users rely on Wi‑Fi offload (work, school, library) and postpone upgrades, extending device lifecycles.
• Education: Adults with high‑school or less show higher “smartphone‑only” internet reliance (phone + hotspot, no fixed service) compared with the state average.
• Race/ethnicity: The county is predominantly White; small minority populations show similar or higher smartphone‑only reliance driven by income and housing rather than ethnicity per se.

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• Terrain and dead zones: Hilly topography, river valleys, and “hollows” create signal shadowing. Coverage is strongest along KY‑61, KY‑90, and in/around Burkesville; gaps persist on rural roads and in valleys—more pronounced than the Kentucky average.
• Carrier footprint:
  • AT&T and Verizon: generally the most reliable in populated corridors; 4G LTE is common, with low‑band 5G present but variable indoors and in valleys.
  • T‑Mobile: improving highway coverage and some 5G, but off‑corridor reliability lags the other two in several rural pockets.
  • MVNOs mirror host‑network performance; users often choose carriers pragmatically by home address and commute route.
• 5G reality: Predominantly low‑band 5G with modest speed gains; limited mid‑band capacity compared to metro Kentucky. Many users see “5G” icons without a meaningful performance bump over LTE.
• Capacity swings: Seasonal recreation around Dale Hollow Lake and weekend events create noticeable congestion spikes—this tourism‑driven variability is more pronounced than statewide norms.
• Fixed broadband interplay: Cable broadband is mainly in Burkesville; outlying areas lean on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite. Fiber is spotty outside select corridors and anchor institutions. Because of this, many households maintain large mobile data plans and use phone hotspots for homework, telehealth, and streaming—higher than the state average.
• Community connectivity: Schools and public buildings provide important Wi‑Fi offload points. Library and school hotspot‑loan programs are often tapped by students and lower‑income families.

Trends that differ from Kentucky statewide averages

• Slightly lower smartphone penetration and higher basic‑phone retention among older adults.
• Higher reliance on mobile data as the primary or fallback home internet option.
• More coverage variability and dead zones due to terrain; 5G capacity gains arrive more slowly.
• Stronger seasonal/crowd‑driven congestion effects tied to recreation areas.
• A wider gap between town‑center and rural‑area experience (signal quality, device upgrade cadence, and plan types).

Notes on method and data confidence

• Figures are synthesized from county population profiles (ACS/Census), state‑level wireless adoption (CDC NHIS), national smartphone adoption (Pew), and FCC broadband/mobile coverage patterns, adjusted for Cumberland County’s rural age/income profile and terrain. Use these as planning estimates.
• For local validation, check: ACS 5‑year Table S2801 (Internet Subscription), FCC National Broadband and Mobile Coverage Maps, Kentucky PSC/FCC tower filings, and speed‑test aggregators around Burkesville vs outlying communities.

Below is a concise, data‑informed snapshot for Cumberland County, Kentucky. Exact county‑level platform stats aren’t published, so figures are modeled from U.S. Census/ACS demographics, Pew Research Center social-media adoption (2023–2024), and rural-usage skews. Treat them as directional estimates.

County snapshot and user stats

• Population: ~6,800; 13+ population: ~5,900
• Active social media users (monthly, 13+): ~4,800 (≈82% of 13+)
• Devices/access: Smartphone-first usage; home broadband is mixed, so video and messaging dominate on mobile

Age mix of social media users (share of users, est.)

• 13–17: ~8%
• 18–34: ~22%
• 35–54: ~34%
• 55+: ~36%

Gender breakdown (of users, est.)

• Women ~52%
• Men ~48% Note: Women over-index on Facebook, Instagram, and Pinterest; men over-index slightly on YouTube and Reddit.

Most-used platforms (share of 13+ using monthly, est.)

• YouTube: ~72%
• Facebook: ~68%
• Facebook Messenger: ~55%
• Instagram: ~32%
• TikTok: ~24%
• Snapchat: ~22%
• Pinterest: ~20% (skews female 25–64)
• X (Twitter): ~11%
• WhatsApp: ~9%
• LinkedIn: ~8% Ranking: YouTube and Facebook are the clear leaders; Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat form a secondary tier concentrated among 13–34.

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first Facebook usage:
  • Heavy participation in local groups: yard sale/buy-sell-trade, school sports/boosters, churches, county events, obituaries, and local news alerts
  • Facebook Marketplace is a top channel for person-to-person sales and local services
• Video habits:
  • YouTube for how‑to, equipment/DIY, outdoor/recreation, and church services; Facebook video for local event recaps
  • Short-form video (Reels/TikTok) adoption strongest in 18–34; creation is modest—most users primarily watch rather than post
• Messaging:
  • Facebook Messenger is the default for many adults; Snapchat dominates teen/college-age messaging; WhatsApp niche (family ties or specific workgroups)
• Posting cadence and timing:
  • Highest engagement evenings (7–10 pm) and weekends; lunchtime upticks on weekdays; early-morning check-ins common among shift and farm workers
• Trust and discovery:
  • Local recommendations in FB groups and Marketplace drive decisions for services, trades, and events
  • Reviews on Google and word-of-mouth in groups often matter more than national review apps
• Cross-county attention:
  • Residents commonly follow nearby counties’ pages and regional TV/radio Facebook pages for weather, road closures, and school updates

Method notes

• Estimates apply rural adjustments to national adoption (Pew Research Center, 2023–2024) and use ACS/Census structure for age/gender; platform figures represent monthly active use as a share of 13+ residents.