Plymouth County

Key demographics — Plymouth County, Massachusetts (latest Census estimates)

• Population

  • ~534,000 (2023 estimate)
  • 530,819 (2020 Census)

• Age

  • Median age: ~42 years
  • Under 18: ~21%
  • 18–64: ~60%
  • 65 and over: ~19%

• Gender

  • Female: ~51.5%
  • Male: ~48.5%

• Race and ethnicity

  • White, non-Hispanic: ~76–77%
  • Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~9–10%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~7%
  • Asian, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
  • Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~3–4%
  • Other (incl. American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander): ~1%

• Households and housing

  • Households: ~200,000
  • Average household size: ~2.65–2.70
  • Family households: ~67%
  • Married-couple households: ~49–50%
  • Owner-occupied housing rate: ~73%
  • Median household income: ~$100,000–$105,000
  • Poverty rate: ~6–7%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2023 ACS 1-year and 2019–2023 ACS 5-year estimates; 2020 Decennial Census)

Plymouth County, MA (population ~534,000) shows near-universal email adoption among connected adults.

• Estimated email users: ~420,000 residents.
• Age distribution of users: 13–17: ~6%; 18–29: ~19%; 30–49: ~33%; 50–64: ~27%; 65+: ~15%.
• Gender split: mirrors population (~52% female, 48% male), ≈218k women and 202k men.
• Digital access: ~93% of households subscribe to broadband; ~96% have a computer; ~9% are smartphone‑only internet households. Adult email adoption is ~92–99% by age group (highest under 50, lowest 65+), so nearly all connected adults maintain at least one active email account.
• Local density/connectivity: ~810 residents per square mile. A predominantly suburban pattern supports extensive cable/fiber coverage across most communities, with slightly lower subscription levels in rural/coastal pockets. Reliance on both mobile data and home broadband continues to rise, reflecting sustained telework and online service use since 2020.

Mobile phone usage in Plymouth County, MA (2023–2024)

Headline estimates

• Population: ~534,000; households: ~205,000.
• Adults (18+): ~417,000.
• Adult mobile phone users (any cellphone): ~395,000 (≈95% of adults).
• Adult smartphone users: ~362,000 (≈87% of adults).
• Households with at least one smartphone: ~191,000 (≈93% of households). Notes on method: point estimates synthesized from U.S. Census/ACS (population, households; ACS S2801 “Types of Computers and Internet Subscriptions” for smartphone-in-household prevalence, 2018–2022 5‑year), Pew Research Center smartphone adoption by age (2023), and CDC/NHIS regional wireless-only patterns for the Northeast. Rounding applied.

Demographic breakdown (users and penetration)

• Age
  • 18–34: 107,000 adults; ~105,000 use a mobile phone (98%); 103,000 use a smartphone (96%).
  • 35–64: 209,000 adults; ~203,000 use a mobile phone (97%); 188,000 use a smartphone (90%).
  • 65+: 101,000 adults; ~88,000 use a mobile phone (87%); 71,000 use a smartphone (70%).
  • Key difference vs Massachusetts: the county’s older age mix (≈19% 65+ vs ≈18% statewide) pulls down overall smartphone penetration by roughly 1–2 percentage points relative to the state.
• Income and education (directional, county-specific)
  • Higher-income coastal and inner–South Shore suburbs (e.g., Hingham, Norwell, Duxbury) track near-universal smartphone ownership among adults (>92%) and higher multi‑device penetration (watches, tablets).
  • Lower‑income tracts (notably in and around Brockton) show slightly higher prepaid/MVNO usage and lower senior smartphone adoption, widening the intra‑county gap relative to the state average.
• Language and race/ethnicity
  • Multilingual households and communities of color (notably Brockton’s Black and Cape Verdean populations) exhibit high mobile dependence for internet access and messaging, consistent with statewide urban patterns, but within Plymouth County these groups account for a larger share of mobile‑only users than in surrounding suburban towns.

Usage patterns and reliance

• Wireless-only adults (no landline): estimated 64–68% (Northeast regional benchmark), translating to ~270,000–285,000 adults; county point estimate ≈66%.
• Mobile as primary home internet: estimated in the low‑teens percentage of households (≈12–14%), higher in tracts with limited fiber-to-the-home options and among renters.
• Multi-line and device stacking: above 2 lines per household is common in family-heavy suburbs; wearable and tablet add‑ons skew higher than national averages but slightly below the Massachusetts urban core.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage
  • 4G LTE: ≥99% of the resident population covered by at least one national carrier (AT&T, T‑Mobile, Verizon), consistent with FCC mobile coverage data for Eastern Massachusetts.
  • 5G: ≥95% population coverage by at least one carrier; low‑band 5G is broadly countywide; mid‑band 5G (2.5–3.7 GHz) is established along the Route 3 corridor, Brockton, and major town centers, with ongoing infill.
• Capacity and speeds (typical user experience)
  • Mid‑band 5G: ~150–300 Mbps down in populated corridors; higher peaks near dense nodes.
  • LTE fallback: ~20–70 Mbps in most suburban areas; indoor performance varies in older construction and wooded/coastal pockets.
• Backhaul and fiber
  • Strong cable backbone across the South Shore supports 5G upgrades; fiber-to-the-home is present but patchier than in Greater Boston’s core, contributing to pockets of higher mobile hotspot reliance.
• Public safety and resilience
  • FirstNet (AT&T) and Band 14 coverage are present across the county; coastal storm seasons drive temporary COW/COLTs deployments and capacity boosts near beaches and event sites.

How Plymouth County differs from the Massachusetts average

• Slightly lower overall smartphone penetration driven by a larger senior share, with a 2–3 point gap among 65+ specifically.
• More pronounced seasonal demand spikes (spring–summer tourism and beach traffic) than the state average, creating localized congestion not as common in inland counties.
• Suburban, car‑commute–centric usage (Route 3, Route 24) concentrates capacity needs along highway corridors rather than transit tunnels and dense urban microcells that dominate Boston/Cambridge planning.
• Home broadband alternatives (cable prevalent, fiber patchier) lead to uneven mobile‑as‑primary‑internet reliance—higher than surrounding high‑fiber suburbs but below many urban neighborhoods statewide.
• Slightly higher prepaid/MVNO share in specific tracts (notably Brockton) than the statewide suburban norm, reflecting local income mix and credit access.

Key takeaways

• Mobile adoption in Plymouth County is very high and broadly in line with Massachusetts, but the county skews older and more suburban, yielding modestly lower smartphone penetration and a different load profile (highway and seasonal hotspots).
• 5G coverage is effectively countywide for basic service, with mid‑band capacity strongest along major corridors and town centers; targeted infill would most improve indoor coverage in coastal and wooded areas and mitigate summer congestion.
• Policy and investment that focus on senior digital inclusion, prepaid affordability, and mid‑band infill near seasonal venues will close the small but persistent gaps with the statewide benchmark.

Social media usage in Plymouth County, Massachusetts (2025 snapshot)

Key population stats

• Total population: approximately 530,000; adults (18+): approximately 420,000
• Gender: roughly 51–52% female, 48–49% male (ACS/Census profile consistent with Massachusetts)

Overall usage

• Adults using at least one social media platform: about 72% of adults (≈300,000 people), based on Pew Research Center’s U.S. adult adoption rate, which closely reflects Massachusetts suburban counties

Most-used platforms among adults (share of adults; local counts are estimates applied to the county’s adult population)

• YouTube: 83% (~349k)
• Facebook: 68% (~286k)
• Instagram: 47% (~197k)
• Pinterest: 35% (~147k)
• TikTok: 33% (~139k)
• Snapchat: 30% (~126k)
• LinkedIn: 30% (~126k)
• WhatsApp: 23% (~97k)
• X (Twitter): 22% (~92k)
• Reddit: 22% (~92k) Note: Individuals use multiple platforms; counts are not additive. Percentages reflect Pew Research Center, 2024, applied to the adult population.

Age-group patterns (Pew 2024 patterns reflected locally)

• 18–29: Very high on YouTube (90%+), Instagram (75–80%), Snapchat (60–65%), TikTok (60%+). Facebook is used but secondary.
• 30–49: Broad multi-platform use. Facebook and YouTube are near-universal; Instagram (50%) and TikTok (35–40%) are strong; LinkedIn notable among professionals.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Pinterest and LinkedIn moderate; TikTok and Snapchat lower but growing.
• 65+: Facebook and YouTube lead; Instagram and Pinterest smaller; TikTok minimal but rising.

Gender breakdown and skews

• County adult base is slightly female-majority. Platform skews mirror national patterns:
  • More female: Facebook (slight), Instagram (slight), Pinterest (strong)
  • More male: Reddit (strong), X/Twitter (moderate), YouTube (slight)
  • Mixed/neutral: LinkedIn, WhatsApp, TikTok (near-balanced overall)

Behavioral trends in Plymouth County

• Community and local info: Facebook Groups and town pages are primary for school updates, youth sports, roadwork, weather/snow alerts, and municipal services; Nextdoor is active in many neighborhoods for hyperlocal safety and services.
• Seasonal content cycles: Summer spikes in beach/coastal content (Scituate, Marshfield, Duxbury, Plymouth Harbor) on Instagram/TikTok; fall and Thanksgiving season elevate tourism/history content around Plymouth. Winter storms drive sharp Facebook/Nextdoor engagement.
• Small-business discovery: Instagram Reels and TikTok are key for restaurants, coffee shops, boutiques; Facebook remains the event and promo hub for family-oriented activities. Reviews and UGC heavily influence dining and services.
• Commuter rhythms: Engagement peaks before work (6–8 a.m.), lunch (12–1 p.m.), and evenings (7–10 p.m.); Sunday night planning posts perform well. LinkedIn activity concentrates weekday mornings.
• Messaging and groups: Facebook Messenger and group chats are widespread for schools and leagues; WhatsApp is common in multilingual and team/club contexts, especially around Brockton and larger towns.
• Ads and calls-to-action: Geo-targeted Facebook/Instagram ads with local landmarks, timely weather/event tie-ins, and clear CTAs perform best; Nextdoor sponsored posts can drive measurable foot traffic for home services and local retail.

Sources and methods

• Population and gender: U.S. Census Bureau/ACS (latest available estimates for Plymouth County)
• Platform adoption and age patterns: Pew Research Center, “Social Media Use in 2024”; county-level figures estimated by applying Pew’s U.S. adult percentages to the local adult population.