Hampshire County

Hampshire County, Massachusetts — key demographics

Population size

• 162,308 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: 36.9 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• 0–17: 16.6%
• 18–24: 20.5%
• 25–44: 26.2%
• 45–64: 19.3%
• 65+: 17.4%

Gender

• Female: 52.1%
• Male: 47.9%

Racial/ethnic composition (Hispanic can be of any race; others are non-Hispanic)

• White: 79.4%
• Hispanic/Latino: 7.5%
• Asian: 6.3%
• Black/African American: 2.9%
• Two or more races: 3.5%
• Other (including American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, some other race): 0.4%

Households and housing

• Households: 64,730
• Average household size: 2.31
• Average family size: 2.95
• Family households: 56.4% of households
• Married-couple families: 44.2% of households
• Households with children under 18: 26.8%
• Owner-occupied: 64.3%; Renter-occupied: 35.7%

Insights

• A large student population in Amherst/Northampton elevates the 18–24 share and keeps the median age below the statewide median.
• Household sizes are modest, with a relatively high share of renters and nonfamily households consistent with college-town housing patterns.

Hampshire County, MA (pop. ≈162,000) has high email penetration driven by its large higher‑education presence (UMass Amherst, Amherst, Smith, Mount Holyoke, Hampshire Colleges; 40k+ students/faculty/staff).

Estimated email users: ≈140,000 residents.

Age distribution of email users (share of users):

• 18–24: 22% (college‑heavy cohort, near‑universal email use)
• 25–44: 33%
• 45–64: 28%
• 65+: 17% (slightly lower adoption but rising)

Gender split among email users: ≈51% female, 49% male (mirrors adult population).

Digital access and trends:

• ≈92% of households subscribe to broadband; ≈96% have a computer/smartphone at home.
• Smartphone‑only households: ≈10%, supporting strong mobile email use.
• Email engagement is reinforced by campus and municipal Wi‑Fi density in Amherst–Northampton–Hadley–South Hadley and widespread cable/fiber along the I‑91 corridor.
• Rural hilltowns in the west have thinner fixed options but ongoing fiber builds have closed most remaining gaps; satellite/DSL persists in pockets.

Local density/connectivity facts:

• The Five College cluster concentrates users and infrastructure, yielding above‑average digital engagement.
• Most populated areas have 100+ Mbps options; public Wi‑Fi and institutional networks substantially boost access and daily email use.

Hampshire County, MA — mobile phone usage summary (focus on what differs from statewide patterns)

Scope and sources

• Baseline facts (population, households, higher‑ed presence) are from the latest decennial census and institutional enrollment reports. Mobile usage estimates are derived from ACS device/broadband measures, national smartphone ownership by age, and the county’s age/student mix. Network availability reflects carrier public coverage disclosures and Massachusetts broadband initiatives through 2024.

Definitive local context

• Population and households: ~162,000 residents and ~63,000 households.
• College-driven demographics: Roughly 39,000 students are in-county during the academic year (UMass Amherst ~32k; Smith ~2.6k; Amherst College ~1.8k; Mount Holyoke ~2.2k; Hampshire College ~0.7k). This student concentration is the single biggest driver of mobile behavior that diverges from Massachusetts averages.

User estimates (2024)

• Smartphone users (age 13+): ~130,000–140,000 countywide. The county’s younger, student‑heavy profile pushes smartphone adoption a few points above the statewide adult average.
• Active mobile lines: ~170,000–190,000 (includes phones, data‑only tablets/hotspots, and wearables), reflecting 1.1–1.2 lines per resident age 13+.
• Smartphone‑only (or smartphone‑primary) internet households: ~20–28% countywide—meaningfully higher than the statewide share—driven by renters and students who forgo fixed broadband.
• Prepaid/MVNO share of lines: ~15–25%, above the state average, reflecting short‑term residency, budget sensitivity, and unlocked BYOD among students and recent graduates.

Demographic usage profile (what’s distinctive locally)

• Age skew: A notably larger 18–29 population share than Massachusetts overall. Near‑universal smartphone adoption in this cohort translates to higher mobile app usage, mobile payments, and on‑campus cellular data demand than the state average.
• Housing and income mix: Higher renter share and lower median household income than the state (student effect). Both correlate with greater smartphone‑only internet use and higher uptake of prepaid or month‑to‑month plans.
• International and transient users: Above‑average eSIM use, dual‑SIM setups, and unlocked devices due to international students; higher churn around academic terms than typical for Massachusetts counties.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• 4G/5G availability
  • Amherst–Hadley–Northampton–Easthampton–South Hadley corridor: All three national carriers provide broad 4G LTE and low‑band 5G; mid‑band 5G (capacity layer) is present in population centers, UMass and downtowns, and along I‑91.
  • Hilltowns (e.g., Chesterfield, Goshen, Cummington, Worthington, Middlefield): Terrain limits coverage and capacity; LTE remains dominant with pockets of low‑band 5G, and speeds vary more than the state average. Residents frequently rely on Wi‑Fi calling and external antennas/boosters.
• Fixed wireless as a complement: T‑Mobile Home Internet is broadly available in the Connecticut River Valley towns; Verizon’s 5G Home/LTE Home appears in and around Northampton/Hadley. Fixed wireless plays a larger role here than in metro‑Boston suburbs.
• Fiber and municipal networks: Beyond cable broadband (Xfinity) in the valley, multiple municipal/utility fiber builds cover rural towns (e.g., Whip City Fiber–operated networks in Chesterfield, Goshen, Worthington, Middlefield, Plainfield, Huntington) and South Hadley’s municipal fiber from SHELD (Fibersonic). This mix provides strong Wi‑Fi backbones but does not fully eliminate outdoor mobile coverage gaps in hillier terrain.
• Siting and densification: New macro sites are relatively sparse; operators lean on upgrades and selective small‑cell placements in downtowns and on/near campuses. Densification is more “node‑selective” than in Boston’s urban core.

How Hampshire County differs from the Massachusetts average

• Higher smartphone‑only internet dependence: Student and renter households push smartphone‑primary access several points above the statewide rate.
• Greater prepaid/MVNO penetration and plan churn: Short academic leasing cycles and international users raise non‑postpaid share beyond the state norm.
• Stronger seasonal demand swings: Noticeable mobile traffic spikes during move‑in, midterms, and events; summer troughs—patterns that are muted at the state level.
• More uneven rural coverage: Hilltowns see larger LTE/5G performance gaps than typical Massachusetts suburbs; reliance on Wi‑Fi calling and boosters is higher.
• Earlier uptake of eSIM/BYOD: Higher incidence of unlocked, dual‑SIM devices and international plans than the state average due to campus demographics.
• Fixed wireless as a pressure valve: Greater role for 5G/LTE home internet in off‑campus housing compared with most of the state.

Operational implications for carriers and service providers

• Capacity, not just coverage, is the binding constraint in the Amherst–Northampton corridor during the academic year; mid‑band 5G and targeted small cells yield outsized benefits.
• Student‑centric retail and onboarding (eSIM, short‑term plans, international roaming) convert better than traditional 2‑year postpaid pitches.
• Rural reliability remains a differentiator: Providers that pair acceptable outdoor coverage with Wi‑Fi calling that “just works” indoors will outperform in the hilltowns.
• Partnerships with municipal fiber operators for backhaul and campus‑adjacent small cells improve user experience where macro builds are constrained.

Key figures to anchor planning

• Residents: ~162k; households: ~63k
• Students in-county during academic year: ~39k
• Estimated smartphone users (13+): ~130k–140k
• Estimated active lines: ~170k–190k
• Estimated smartphone‑only/primary households: ~20–28% (higher than statewide)
• Estimated prepaid/MVNO share: ~15–25% (higher than statewide)

These figures reflect 2024 conditions and the county’s distinct university‑anchored profile, which drives higher mobile dependence, more prepaid/BYOD usage, and sharper seasonal swings than Massachusetts overall, alongside more pronounced rural coverage variability.

Hampshire County, MA — social media snapshot (2025)

Definitive local context

• Population: 162,000 (2020 Census), anchored by the Five College area (Amherst, Northampton, South Hadley, etc.), which produces an unusually large 18–24 cohort compared with state and national averages.

Modeled county estimates (derived from Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. platform adoption and ACS county demographics; multiple-platform use means totals exceed 100%)

• Overall penetration: ~70–75% of residents use at least one social platform (roughly 113k–122k people).
• By age (share using any social platform):
  • 18–29: ~90–95%
  • 30–49: ~80–85%
  • 50–64: ~65–70%
  • 65+: ~40–50%
• Most-used platforms (share of county residents who use each platform):
  • YouTube: ~80–85%
  • Facebook: ~60–65% (strongest among 35+)
  • Instagram: ~50–55% overall; ~80–90% among 18–29
  • TikTok: ~35–40% overall; ~60–70% among 18–29
  • Snapchat: ~30–35% overall; ~60–70% among 18–24
  • LinkedIn: ~25–30% (academia/professionals)
  • X (Twitter): ~20–25%
  • Reddit: ~20–25% (skews student/male)
  • Pinterest: ~25–30% (skews female)
  • Nextdoor: ~10–15% (homeowners 35+)
• Gender breakdown among users (reflecting a slightly majority-female population profile):
  • Overall users: ~51–53% women, ~47–49% men
  • Platform skews: Pinterest heavily female (70%+); Instagram slightly female-leaning (+5–10 pts); Facebook slightly female-leaning; Reddit and X male-leaning (~60–70% men); TikTok close to balanced.

Behavioral trends in the county

• Student-led usage: The five-college presence pushes Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat to very high adoption in Amherst–Northampton; Facebook is used for campus groups and events but less as a daily feed by under-30s.
• Events and community: Facebook Events and Instagram Stories/Reels drive discovery for local music, arts, and campus happenings; Reddit and Discord communities are common for course/program chatter and housing.
• Local information: Town governments, libraries, schools, and local media rely primarily on Facebook; Nextdoor usage clusters in homeowner neighborhoods outside the student cores; Reddit is used for breaking local info and Q&A.
• Messaging habits: Under-30s favor Snapchat and Instagram DMs; 30+ lean on Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp (notably among international communities tied to the universities).
• Content format: Short-form vertical video (Reels/TikTok) performs best for student and arts content; photo carousels and Facebook posts work for civic updates; LinkedIn is active among faculty/staff and research units.
• Seasonality: Engagement spikes around semester start/return (late August–September, January) and dips during summer/academic breaks.

Notes on methodology

• Percentages are county-level estimates modeled from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption rates and applied to Hampshire County’s age structure (ACS). They reflect likely local usage given the county’s unusually large 18–24 population. For planning, treat them as directional but actionable ranges.

Primary sources

• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use (2023–2024 platform adoption by age and gender)
• U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census and ACS county demographics
• DataReportal (U.S. social media penetration, 2024–2025)