Franklin County

Here are key demographics for Franklin County, Maine. Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 ACS 5‑year estimates). Figures rounded.

Population

• Total: 29,986 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~46 years
• Under 18: ~18%
• 18–64: ~59%
• 65 and over: ~23%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive where noted)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~95%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~0.5–0.6%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~0.5–0.6%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~0.5%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~1–2%

Households and housing

• Households (occupied housing units): ~13,000
• Average household size: ~2.2 persons
• Family households: ~60%
• Nonfamily households: ~40% (including ~30% living alone)
• Owner-occupied rate: ~75–80%
• Renter-occupied rate: ~20–25%

Franklin County, ME (pop. ~30,000). Estimates based on 2023 Census/ACS, Pew, NTIA/FCC rural connectivity data.

Estimated email users: 22,000–24,000 residents.

Age distribution of users (approx.):

• 18–34: 5,500–6,000 (high adoption, ~95%)
• 35–64: 12,000–13,000 (very high, ~90–95%)
• 65+: 5,500–6,500 (solid but lower, ~75–85%)
• Teens 13–17 add ~1,200–1,400 users

Gender split: Roughly even (≈50/50), with negligible difference by sex.

Digital access trends:

• Home internet: Most households are online; rural gaps persist. Smartphone ownership is high; 15–20% are likely smartphone‑only users.
• Daily email use common among working‑age adults; older adults use email regularly but less intensively.
• Reliance on public Wi‑Fi (libraries, schools, UMaine–Farmington area) remains important in lower‑coverage towns.

Local density/connectivity:

• Very rural: ~17 people per square mile across mountainous terrain.
• FCC/Maine Connectivity Authority identify underserved census blocks, especially in western/northern townships; fiber builds are expanding along primary corridors and in/around Farmington, Wilton, Kingfield, Rangeley, and Phillips.
• Coverage and speeds drop outside town centers; terrain complicates last‑mile fixed broadband, making mobile/hotspot fallback common.

Below is a concise, decision‑oriented snapshot of mobile phone usage in Franklin County, Maine, with emphasis on how it differs from statewide patterns. Figures are best-available estimates based on rural/U.S. and Maine benchmarks, the county’s population profile, and typical carrier footprints in western Maine’s mountains; use them as planning ranges and validate locally before committing resources.

User estimates

• Total smartphone users: 19,000–23,000 unique users
  • Basis: County population ~30,000; adult share ~80%; rural smartphone adoption ~75–85% of adults, plus near-universal adoption among teens.
• Mobile-only internet households (using cellular as primary home internet): 18–25% in Franklin County vs roughly mid‑teens statewide.
• 5G-capable device share: 55–65% of smartphones in Franklin County vs 65–75% statewide (older device mix persists longer in rural areas).

Demographic breakdown (what stands out vs Maine overall)

• Age
  • Two poles: a sizable 18–24 cluster around the University of Maine–Farmington (near‑universal smartphone and app use) and a large 65+ cohort in outlying towns (lower smartphone and 5G device adoption).
  • Net effect: County adoption slightly below state average, but heavier app/data intensity around Farmington and resort areas than other rural counties.
• Income and plan types
  • Median incomes trend below state averages; prepaid and budget Android share is higher, and price sensitivity/churn are higher than statewide norms.
  • Mobile‑only reliance is notably higher where wired broadband is limited.
• Housing/seasonality
  • Strong seasonal swing from ski/lakes tourism (Carrabassett Valley, Rangeley, Eustis/Stratton): weekend/holiday spikes in network load and roaming traffic not seen at the same scale statewide.
• Work patterns
  • Outdoor recreation, forestry, and logistics workers depend on corridor coverage and offline‑capable apps; this raises the importance of multi‑carrier redundancy more than in southern/coastal Maine.

Digital infrastructure points (differences vs statewide)

• Coverage pattern
  • Robust along main corridors (US‑2, ME‑4, ME‑27, ME‑16) and town centers; pronounced dead zones in mountain valleys, around large lakes, and closer to the Quebec border. Terrain makes indoor coverage harder outside town centers than in much of southern Maine.
• Carrier mix
  • Verizon and UScellular tend to be stronger in remote areas than T‑Mobile; AT&T is solid in towns and along highways. This skew toward Verizon/UScellular is more pronounced than statewide.
• 5G availability
  • Mostly low‑band along major routes and in towns; mid‑band 5G capacity sites are sparse compared with southern/coastal counties. Users spend more time on LTE, which depresses real‑world speeds relative to state averages.
• Backhaul and capacity
  • More sites still depend on microwave backhaul, with incremental fiber upgrades underway; capacity constraints show up during tourist peaks more than in most Maine counties.
• Public Wi‑Fi and offload
  • Dense offload options exist in Farmington (UMF campus/town) and resort bases, but are thin in smaller towns—driving higher per‑user cellular data consumption than the state average in those places.
• Cross‑border edge cases
  • Proximity to Quebec introduces occasional unintended roaming in northern segments; this is a minor but distinctive risk vs most of Maine.

Trends to watch (where Franklin County is diverging)

• Faster growth in mobile‑only households in unserved/underserved pockets as people bridge gaps before new fiber arrives; this rate likely exceeds the statewide shift.
• Capacity strain concentrated on weekends/winters in ski/lakes towns; investment cases for mid‑band 5G and additional sectors are stronger here than statewide averages would suggest.
• Gradual improvement as fiber backhaul expands into towers and as new FTTH builds reduce mobile‑only reliance in some towns—expect a two‑track experience: improving in and near fibered towns, stubbornly spotty in remote valleys.

Planning implications

• For businesses and public agencies: provision dual‑carrier or eSIM failover; test on Verizon and AT&T/UScellular at a minimum. Avoid T‑Mobile‑only deployments outside corridors unless site surveys confirm coverage.
• For carriers: highest ROI for mid‑band 5G/capacity adds is around Farmington and resort corridors; targeted fill‑in sites in mountain valleys will materially change user experience.
• For community planners: accelerating FTTH backhaul to macro sites will lift mobile performance; add public Wi‑Fi in village centers to reduce peak cellular load.

Suggested sources to validate/refine locally

• FCC mobile coverage maps and drive‑test data; Maine Connectivity Authority maps.
• ACS/Census for population and age mix; UMaine–Farmington enrollment for youth density.
• Carrier 5G/LTE coverage and planned upgrades; FirstNet buildouts along highways.
• Local ISP build plans (e.g., fiber expansions) to track future shifts from mobile‑only.

Franklin County, ME – social media snapshot (2025, estimated)

Notes on method: County-level statistics are sparse. Figures below are estimates derived from Franklin County demographics (~30K residents), rural Maine broadband adoption, and recent U.S. platform usage patterns (Pew Research, 2023–2024), adjusted for a rural/older population and the UMaine–Farmington student presence.

Overall reach

• Adult population: ~24K
• Adult social media users: ~16K–18K (≈65%–75% of adults)
• Daily users: ~11K–14K adults (≈70%–80% of users)
• Household broadband: ~70%–80% of households; smartphone access ~80%–85% of adults

Age groups (share using social media)

• 13–17: ~90%–95% (heavy Snapchat/TikTok/YouTube)
• 18–29: ~90%+ (Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube dominant; boosted by UMF students)
• 30–49: ~80%–85% (Facebook, YouTube; Instagram rising)
• 50–64: ~65%–75% (Facebook, YouTube; some Pinterest)
• 65+: ~45%–55% (primarily Facebook, YouTube)

Gender breakdown (among users)

• Women: ~54%–56% (over-index on Facebook, Pinterest)
• Men: ~44%–46% (over-index on YouTube, Reddit)
• Nonbinary/other: small but present in student/younger cohorts (heavier on TikTok, Instagram, Discord)

Most-used platforms (adult “at least monthly” share)

• YouTube: ~70%–75%
• Facebook: ~65%–70% (Groups/Marketplace are core)
• Instagram: ~35%–40%
• TikTok: ~28%–35% (higher in Farmington/Rangeley tourism seasons)
• Snapchat: ~25%–30% (very high among teens/UMF students)
• Pinterest: ~25%–35% (women 25–64)
• LinkedIn: ~10%–15% (lower in rural labor mix)
• X/Twitter: ~10%–15%
• Reddit: ~10%–14% (outdoors, DIY, tech, student subs)
• WhatsApp: ~5%–10% (lower than U.S. average; iMessage/SMS/Messenger more common)
• Discord: ~8%–12% (students, gaming, outdoor clubs)

Behavioral trends

• Facebook as the local hub: Town and school updates, storm and road conditions, events, obituaries, and buy/sell/trade. Marketplace is a primary channel for secondhand goods and seasonal gear.
• Seasonal spikes: Winter (Sugarloaf/Carrabassett Valley) and summer (Rangeley lakes/hiking) drive bursts of Instagram Reels, TikTok, and YouTube shorts; local businesses increase posting and ad spend in Oct–Mar and Jun–Aug.
• Student-driven formats: UMF population concentrates attention on short-form video (TikTok/IG Reels), Snapchat Stories, and Discord for campus clubs and gaming.
• Video-first consumption: Even older users engage with short, captioned videos (plowing updates, town meetings, local news clips) on Facebook and YouTube.
• Community identity content: Hunting/fishing, snowmobile/ATV trail reports, foliage/ski conditions, homesteading/DIY, craft fairs, and local sports get strong engagement.
• Messaging habits: Facebook Messenger and iMessage dominate group coordination; WhatsApp niche. Event RSVPs largely through Facebook; younger users coordinate via Snapchat.
• Timing: Evenings (7–10 pm) and weekend mornings perform best; weather events create real-time engagement spikes.
• Trust patterns: Users favor info from known locals, town pages, and regional outlets; skepticism toward anonymous pages; recommendations in local Groups strongly influence purchasing and attendance.

Use these ranges as directional guidance; for campaign planning, validate locally with a quick poll of town FB groups, UMF channels, and tourist-season venue followers.