Charles County

Charles County, Maryland — key demographics

Population

• About 173,000 residents (2023 Census estimate)

Age

• Median age: ~39 years
• Under 18: ~24%
• 65 and over: ~15%

Gender

• Female: ~51.5%
• Male: ~48.5%

Race/ethnicity

• Black or African American (alone): ~49%
• White, non-Hispanic: ~35%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~7%
• Asian (alone): ~4%
• Two or more races: ~6%
• Other (AIAN, NHPI, other): ~1% Note: “Hispanic/Latino” overlaps with race categories.

Households and housing

• ~62,000 households
• Average household size: ~2.9
• Family households: ~75% of households; married-couple families: ~50–55%
• Homeownership rate: ~80%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2023 Population Estimates; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year; 2020 Census Demographic Profile).

Charles County, MD — email usage snapshot (estimates)

• Population and density: ≈170,000 residents; ≈360 people/sq mi. Residents cluster around Waldorf–La Plata (US‑301), with more rural areas to the south/west.
• Estimated email users: 130,000–140,000 (≈93–96% of residents age 13+), based on ACS age structure and national email-adoption rates.
• Age distribution of email users (approx): • 13–17: 8k–10k (6–7%) • 18–29: 20k–24k (15–18%) • 30–49: 50k–55k (37–40%) • 50–64: 30k–34k (22–25%) • 65+: 18k–20k (12–15%)
• Gender split: Mirrors population (~51% female, 49% male); email usage is near parity by gender.
• Digital access trends: • ~95% of households have a computer; ~90–92% have a broadband subscription (ACS-like levels for the county). • Smartphone-only internet households estimated at ~10–12%. • Connectivity is strongest in denser corridors; rural pockets have fewer high‑speed wireline options and rely more on cable, fixed wireless, or cellular. • Home broadband and smartphone adoption have continued to rise since 2020, sustaining high, stable email use across age groups.

Notes: Figures are synthesized from recent ACS county indicators and national benchmarks (Pew/industry) applied to local demographics.

Below is a planning-grade summary built from publicly available indicators (ACS/Census population and demographics, Pew smartphone ownership trends, FCC coverage/broadband maps) and market norms in the DC–Maryland region. Treat figures as modeled estimates, not official counts.

High-level context

• Charles County is a fast-growing, largely suburban county south of DC (Waldorf/La Plata core) with rural peninsulas along the Potomac. This urban–rural split strongly shapes coverage and adoption, more so than in Maryland overall.

User estimates (unique users and lines)

• Population base: roughly 167,000–175,000 residents.
• Unique mobile users: approximately 130,000–145,000 people carry a mobile phone (driven by high adult smartphone ownership and strong teen uptake).
• Active lines/SIMs: on the order of 160,000–185,000, reflecting personal + work lines and add‑on devices; the lines-per-user ratio is a bit lower than in Maryland’s denser urban counties (fewer enterprise/IoT lines per capita).
• Usage patterns: heavy evening/weekend data demand in residential corridors (Waldorf, La Plata, St. Charles), with commuter-driven outflow of daytime usage toward the DC core.

Demographic shape of the mobile user base

• Race/ethnicity: a larger share of Black/African American users than the Maryland average; smaller Asian and Hispanic shares. This is a notable divergence from statewide mix and influences app/media affinities and family-plan prevalence.
• Age: relatively more families with school-age children and teens than the state average, and a slightly smaller 65+ share. Expect strong smartphone penetration among teens and high video/social usage in the after-school window.
• Income: household incomes are above the national average but generally below Maryland’s highest-income counties (e.g., Montgomery/Howard). That yields high smartphone adoption and unlimited-plan uptake, with some price sensitivity that supports mid-tier and family bundle plans.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• 5G availability: mid-band 5G from major carriers is broadly present along US‑301, MD‑5, MD‑210, and in Waldorf/La Plata. Performance is solid in the suburban core.
• mmWave/small cells: relatively sparse compared to Baltimore City and the inner DC suburbs; the county relies more on macro sites. This is a key difference from the state’s urban centers.
• Rural gaps: service degrades in low-density southern and western areas (e.g., Nanjemoy, Cobb Neck, riverfront peninsulas) due to terrain, trees, and long site spacing. Indoor coverage can be inconsistent in these zones.
• Backhaul/fiber: cable is common in the suburban core; fiber-to-the-home remains patchy outside dense areas. County and state-funded expansion programs are targeting unserved/underserved pockets—Charles is in a catch-up phase relative to Maryland’s fiber-rich metros.
• Fixed Wireless Access (FWA): 5G Home Internet from national carriers has meaningful uptake in exurban/rural neighborhoods where fiber is limited—higher relative reliance than the statewide average.
• Public/anchor sites: schools and county facilities are increasingly fiber-fed; fair outdoor LTE/5G coverage at parks and along major commuter routes; event-driven spikes (schools, sports complexes) are notable but localized.

Trends that differ from Maryland overall

• Stronger suburban–rural divide: performance swings more sharply between Waldorf/La Plata and outlying peninsulas than the average Maryland county.
• Fewer small cells/mmWave: less densification than in Baltimore/inner-DC suburbs; macro-centric networks dominate.
• Higher FWA dependence: greater role for 5G fixed wireless as a primary broadband alternative where cable/fiber are scarce.
• Demographic tilt: a higher Black user share and more households with children than Maryland overall, shaping demand toward family plans, high mobile video/social use, and robust evening peaks.
• Commuter effect: a pronounced weekday demand shift toward the DC employment centers, with evening and weekend surges back in-county; this diurnal pattern is stronger than the statewide norm.

What this implies for planners and providers

• Capacity investments pay off most along US‑301/MD‑5 corridors and dense residential zones in Waldorf/St. Charles/La Plata.
• Targeted macro infill and selective small-cell deployments can relieve edge-of-sector congestion in fast-growing subdivisions.
• Rural coverage improvements (new sites, satellite backhaul, or community fiber for backhaul) will close notable service gaps and reduce FWA contention.
• Pricing and packaging that favor multi-line family plans and mid-tier unlimited will track local demographics better than premium-only strategies common in Maryland’s wealthiest counties.

Below is a concise, planning-ready snapshot. Where local, survey-grade figures aren’t published for Charles County, I use Pew Research Center’s latest U.S. adult social media adoption rates as a proxy and apply them to the county’s adult population to estimate local reach.

County context

• Population: ~171,000 (2023 est.). Adults (18+): ~130,000 (about 76%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts.

Most‑used platforms (estimated local adult reach)

• Percentages are U.S. adult usage (Pew, 2024). Counts are estimates = platform % x ~130,000 adults.
• YouTube: 83% ≈ 108k adults
• Facebook: 68% ≈ 88k
• Instagram: 47% ≈ 61k
• Pinterest: 35% ≈ 46k
• TikTok: 33% ≈ 43k
• LinkedIn: 30% ≈ 39k
• Snapchat: 27% ≈ 35k
• X (Twitter): 22% ≈ 29k
• WhatsApp: 21% ≈ 27k Note: Nextdoor is smaller but meaningful in suburbs; national adult usage is in the teens-to-~20% range.

Age group patterns (Pew directional benchmarks)

• 13–17 (teens): Very heavy on YouTube; TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram dominate; Facebook is minor.
• 18–29: YouTube ~9 in 10; Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok are all high; Facebook still substantial but not primary.
• 30–49: YouTube and Facebook lead; Instagram and Pinterest strong; TikTok moderate; LinkedIn notable for professionals/commuters.
• 50–64: Facebook is the hub; YouTube strong; Pinterest moderate; Instagram/TikTok lower.
• 65+: Facebook and YouTube are the mainstays; most other platforms are niche.

Gender tendencies (directional)

• Women: Over‑index on Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest. Strong engagement in local groups, schools, youth sports, churches, and Marketplace.
• Men: Over‑index on YouTube, Reddit, X. Higher engagement with news/sports, tech, and policy content.
• LinkedIn usage is fairly even to slightly higher among men; WhatsApp varies by community/family networks.

Behavioral trends in Charles County (what locals do on social)

• Facebook Groups as community infrastructure: HOAs, PTAs, youth sports, local buy/sell, county alerts (storms, schools, traffic).
• Short‑form video growth: Local restaurants, events, gyms, realtors lean into Instagram Reels/TikTok for discovery.
• Commuter info: MD 301/5 corridor updates, incident alerts, and transit news shared via Facebook/X and local pages.
• Nextdoor/neighborhood chats: Home services referrals, safety alerts, lost & found, hyperlocal recommendations.
• WhatsApp/Group chats: Youth teams, churches, and family networks coordinate via private groups.
• Civic/government: County agencies and first responders use Facebook and X for timely messaging; residents expect rapid updates and comment responsiveness.
• Marketplace/local commerce: Strong Facebook Marketplace usage for furniture, vehicles, and services; coupons/deals perform for retailers in Waldorf/La Plata.
• Content that performs: Community pride, local events (e.g., fairs, school activities), public safety updates, hyperlocal deals, and short, captioned videos.

How to use this

• Treat platform percentages as a solid proxy for adult reach; adjust tactics by neighborhood and audience (e.g., schools/teams → Instagram/Snapchat; homeowners/parents → Facebook/Nextdoor).
• Lean video-first (vertical, <=30–45 seconds) and community-centered messaging.
• For professional audiences commuting to the D.C. area, include LinkedIn and X for reach/credibility.

Sources

• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use (latest 2024 platform adoption by U.S. adults; teen patterns from recent Pew teen surveys)
• U.S. Census Bureau, QuickFacts: Charles County, Maryland (population and age structure)

Note: Exact Charles County platform penetration may vary; the above estimates are derived by applying national adoption rates to the local adult population.