Charlevoix County

Here’s a concise demographic snapshot of Charlevoix County, Michigan (latest available U.S. Census Bureau estimates; primarily 2019–2023 ACS 5-year, rounded):

Population

• Total population: ~26.6K (2023)
• Growth: roughly flat to slight increase since 2020

Age

• Median age: ~49 years
• Under 18: ~18–19%
• 65 and over: ~25–26%

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Race and ethnicity (shares of total population)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~92–94%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2–3%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~0.4–0.6%
• Black, non-Hispanic: ~0.3–0.5%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: ~0%

Households

• Total households: ~11.5K–11.8K
• Average household size: ~2.2–2.3
• Family households: ~60–65% of households (avg family size ~2.8)
• Nonfamily/individuals living alone: ~30–35% of households (about ~12–14% are 65+ living alone)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019–2023 (5-year) and Population Estimates Program (2023). Figures rounded; minor totals may not sum to 100% due to rounding.

Charlevoix County, MI email usage (estimates)

• Population: ~26,000. Population density ~60 per square mile (land area), with most residents in/around Boyne City, Charlevoix, and East Jordan.
• Email users: ~21,000–23,000 residents use email regularly (roughly 80–90% of ages 12+), consistent with rural U.S. internet/email adoption.
• Age pattern: County skews older, so a large share of users are 35+. Estimated email adoption by age:
  • 13–17: 75–85% (school-driven)
  • 18–34: 95%+
  • 35–54: ~95%
  • 55–64: ~90–95%
  • 65+: ~75–85%
• Gender split among users: roughly 51% female, 49% male, mirroring the population.
• Digital access trends:
  • About 80–90% of households report a broadband subscription; 5–10% lack home internet; 10–15% are smartphone‑only.
  • Fiber availability is expanding via regional providers/co-ops; towns typically have cable/fiber, while rural townships rely more on fixed wireless/DSL and, in some pockets, satellite.
  • Seasonal tourism and second homes increase peak demand in summer along Lake Charlevoix/Lake Michigan corridors (US‑31/M‑66).

Notes: Figures synthesized from recent ACS/Michigan broadband indicators and national email adoption; use as directional estimates.

Mobile phone usage in Charlevoix County, Michigan — 2024 snapshot

At‑a‑glance user estimates (order‑of‑magnitude; based on ACS 5‑year device/subscription patterns for rural MI, county demographics, and recent carrier builds)

• Population and adult users: ~26–27k residents; ~22k adults. Estimated adult smartphone users: ~18–19k (roughly 82–86% adoption among adults, a few points lower than Michigan overall).
• Households with smartphones: ~10–11k out of ~12–12.5k households have at least one smartphone.
• Cellular‑only internet households: ~2.0–2.5k households rely primarily or exclusively on a cellular data plan for home internet (roughly 16–22%, higher than Michigan’s ~11–13%).
• Prepaid and hotspot reliance: Above state average, especially in rural townships and among seasonal/second‑home households.

What’s different from Michigan overall

• Slightly lower overall smartphone adoption: Driven by an older age profile and pockets with weaker indoor coverage; gap is most visible among residents 65+.
• Higher mobile‑only internet reliance: More homes use phone plans or hotspots as their primary connection due to patchy wireline options outside towns.
• Strong seasonality: Summer tourism (Lake Charlevoix/Lake Michigan, festivals) and winter sports (Boyne Mountain area) create periodic congestion uncommon at the state level; businesses and event organizers lean on mobile point‑of‑sale and temporary capacity boosts.
• Coverage variability by micro‑area: Service is good in lakeshore corridors and towns but notably spottier in wooded/valley interiors—greater variability than typical suburban/urban Michigan.
• Post‑ACP shock: The wind‑down of the Affordable Connectivity Program in 2024 appears to have shifted some low‑income and seasonal households to mobile‑only plans at a higher rate than statewide averages.

Demographic patterns shaping usage

• Age: Higher share of 65+ than the state. Estimated smartphone adoption by age:
  • 18–34: near‑universal (mid‑ to high‑90s), similar to state.
  • 35–64: high (upper‑80s to low‑90s), modestly below state in the most rural townships.
  • 65+: lower (roughly mid‑60s to mid‑70s), pulling down the countywide average more than at the state level.
• Income and housing:
  • Cellular‑only and prepaid usage concentrated among lower‑income households, renters, and seasonal/second‑home areas lacking cable/fiber.
  • Short‑term workers in hospitality/tourism often rely on prepaid plans and hotspots.
• Geography:
  • Towns (Charlevoix, Boyne City, East Jordan): higher 5G availability, more in‑home Wi‑Fi offload, and better indoor coverage.
  • Interior townships/Jordan River Valley: more call dropout zones, weaker indoor LTE/5G, greater dependence on external antennas or Wi‑Fi calling.
• Race/ethnicity: The county is less diverse than Michigan overall; digital‑divide patterns correlate more with age, income, and location than with race. Tribal citizens present in the region may face localized coverage gaps on or near tribal lands compared with nearby towns.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carriers: All three nationwide carriers operate here. Practical experience suggests:
  • Strong lakeshore/highway coverage (US‑31, M‑66/M‑75, US‑131 corridor just east of the county).
  • Mid‑band 5G in and around towns; inland coverage leans on low‑band 5G/LTE with slower speeds.
  • Residents and small businesses sometimes keep dual‑carrier setups for redundancy—more common than in Michigan’s metros.
• Tower density and terrain: Fewer macro sites per square mile than downstate metros; forested, hilly sections create dead zones and weaker indoor signal—especially compared to Michigan’s urban counties.
• Backhaul and small cells: Limited small‑cell presence outside core town areas; backhaul to some rural sites can constrain peak‑season capacity.
• Wireline interplay (impacts mobile reliance):
  • Towns: Charter Spectrum cable widely available; fiber builds expanding.
  • Rural areas: Ongoing electric‑co‑op fiber (e.g., Great Lakes Energy/Truestream) and fixed‑wireless providers reduce but haven’t eliminated unserved pockets; legacy DSL persists in spots.
  • Result: Mobile hotspots fill gaps; cellular‑only home internet remains higher than the state average.
• Emergency and outdoor use: Boaters on Lake Charlevoix/Lake Michigan nearshore typically have workable signal; deeper inland lakes and valleys can require signal boosters for reliable voice/data.

Usage trends to watch

• Continued fiber buildouts should gradually reduce cellular‑only households, but not eliminate them in the most remote areas.
• Carriers are adding mid‑band 5G on existing towers; expect better capacity in towns and along corridors, with slower improvement in interior valleys.
• Seasonal congestion will remain a planning factor; temporary cells and spectrum adds during peak events can materially improve experience.
• Age‑driven gap: As smartphone adoption among seniors rises, the countywide adoption rate should converge toward the state average, provided indoor coverage improves.

Notes on uncertainty

• Figures are estimates synthesized from recent statewide/county ACS device and subscription patterns, rural Michigan benchmarks, and known local infrastructure characteristics. For planning, validate with the latest ACS table S2801 (Types of Computers and Internet Subscriptions), FCC Broadband Map, and carrier coverage/performance data specific to Charlevoix County.

Here’s a concise, practical snapshot of social media usage in Charlevoix County, MI. Figures are estimates, derived from Pew Research 2024 U.S. platform adoption, adjusted to the county’s older, rural age profile and ACS demographics.

Size of the audience

• Population: ~26,000; adults (18+): ~21,000
• Adults using at least one social platform: ~75–80% (≈15,500–16,800 people)
• Teen users (13–17): small but influential cohort (≈1,600–1,900), heavily video- and chat-first

Most-used platforms among adults (estimated share of all adults)

• YouTube: 78–82%
• Facebook: 70–75%
• Instagram: 35–40%
• Pinterest: 30–35%
• TikTok: 22–27%
• Snapchat: 18–22%
• LinkedIn: 18–22%
• WhatsApp: 15–20%
• X (Twitter): 12–16%
• Nextdoor: 10–15%
• Reddit: 10–14%

Age mix and usage patterns

• 18–29: Smaller share locally; high on Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat; Facebook mainly for events/groups.
• 30–49: Heaviest multi-platform use; Facebook Groups/Marketplace, YouTube how-tos; Instagram for local lifestyle.
• 50–64: Strong on Facebook and YouTube; growing use of Instagram; Pinterest for projects, recipes, home.
• 65+: Facebook is dominant; YouTube for news/how-tos; low TikTok/Instagram adoption but rising.
• Teens (13–17): YouTube ~90%+, Snapchat and TikTok ~60%+, Instagram ~60%; Facebook minimal except for school/sports updates.

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall users: roughly balanced; slight female majority.
• Skews: Facebook and Instagram lean female; Pinterest strongly female; LinkedIn, Reddit, X lean male. YouTube broadly universal.

Local behavioral trends to know

• Facebook Groups are the community hub: school sports, road conditions, lost/found pets, weather, civic updates, and event coordination.
• Marketplace is highly active for seasonal gear and recreation (boats, ATVs, snow gear), home goods, and trades services.
• Seasonal spikes: Summer tourism (lake/boating, Venetian Festival, Boyne events) increases Instagram and short-form video; winter sees snow, ski, and ice conditions content.
• Video-first: How-to, local fishing/boating, trail and conditions checks perform well on YouTube and Facebook; Reels/Shorts with clear local visuals do best.
• Event-driven posting: High engagement around festivals, parades, school calendars, closures, and severe weather.
• Messaging behavior: DMs via Facebook/Instagram for business hours, reservations, and availability; expect quick responses.
• Trust and locality: Posts with recognizable landmarks, faces, and community ties outperform generic brand content.
• Nextdoor is spotty; Facebook Groups often fill the neighborhood-news role better in rural areas.

Quick channel tips

• If you’re resource-constrained: prioritize Facebook (Pages + Groups) and YouTube; add Instagram Reels for under-45 reach.
• Use photo/video of local scenes; post around early evening and weekend mornings; cross-post events to local Groups.
• For youth reach: short vertical video on Instagram/TikTok; partner with schools/teams and local creators.

Method note: Estimates blend Pew Research Center’s 2024 platform adoption rates with Charlevoix County’s older age structure and rural behavior patterns (ACS). Exact county-level platform data are not directly published, so treat figures as planning-level approximations.