Otsego County

Otsego County, Michigan — key demographics

Population size

• 2020 Census: 25,091
• 2023 population estimate: ~26,100 (continued modest growth since 2020)

Age

• Median age: ~44 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 18–64: ~57–58%
• 65 and over: ~21–22%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 5-year estimates)

• White (alone): ~93%
• Black or African American (alone): ~0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native (alone): ~0.8%
• Asian (alone): ~0.5%
• Two or more races: ~4%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~2–3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~91%

Households and housing (ACS 5-year estimates)

• Households: ~10,500
• Average household size: ~2.36
• Family households: ~66% of households; average family size ~2.9
• Housing units: ~15,000
• Owner-occupied rate: ~79%; renter-occupied ~21%
• Notable share of vacant/seasonal units relative to occupied households

Insights

• Older age profile than the U.S. overall, with a sizable 65+ share.
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White population with small but growing multiracial and Hispanic shares.
• High homeownership and a meaningful seasonal housing presence, typical of northern Michigan counties.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (population count) and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (most recent release). Population estimate from the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program (2023).

Otsego County, MI snapshot

• Population 25,091 (2020); land 526 sq mi; density ≈48/sq mi; ≈10,300 households.
• Estimated email users: ~19,700 residents (about 78–80% of the population; ~92% of adults), derived from county age mix and U.S. email adoption rates.
• Age profile of email users (approx.): 18–34 ~4.5k (23%); 35–54 ~6.2k (32%); 55–64 ~3.3k (17%); 65+ ~4.4k (22%). Teen users (13–17) add ~1.4k.
• Gender split among users: roughly mirrors the population, ≈50–51% female and 49–50% male.

Digital access and connectivity

• Broadband is strongest in Gaylord and along the I‑75 corridor (cable/fiber); outer townships rely more on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite.
• Ongoing fiber builds by Great Lakes Energy’s Truestream and Spectrum have expanded coverage since 2021; satellite (e.g., Starlink) fills remaining gaps.
• Household broadband subscription rates are in the low‑to‑mid‑80% range locally; roughly one in eight households are smartphone‑only, and about one in ten have no home subscription.
• Post‑2022 infrastructure repairs in Gaylord improved network resilience.

Insight: Email reach is effectively universal among working‑age adults; remaining non‑users are concentrated among the oldest residents and households without reliable home broadband in low‑density areas.

Mobile phone usage in Otsego County, Michigan — summary and trends

Executive snapshot

• Population base: roughly 25–26 thousand residents; about 19.5–20.0 thousand adults (18+).
• Estimated adult smartphone users: 16.5–17.5 thousand (about 84–89% of adults). This is a few points lower than Michigan’s overall adult smartphone penetration.
• Households relying on mobile as primary home internet (“smartphone‑only”): approximately 20–24% of households in Otsego (about 2,100–2,500 households), notably higher than Michigan’s ~12–15%.
• Coverage profile: essentially universal 4G LTE along primary corridors and towns; mid‑band 5G access for roughly 55–65% of residents (vs ~85–90% statewide), with persistent indoor and off‑corridor gaps.

User estimates by demographic segment

• Age
  • 18–29: ~97% smartphone adoption; ~2.9–3.0k users.
  • 30–49: ~95–96%; ~5.8–6.0k users.
  • 50–64: ~86–90%; ~5.0–5.2k users.
  • 65+: ~65–70%; ~3.1–3.4k users.
  • What’s different from the state: the 65+ cohort trails Michigan seniors by ~5–10 percentage points, pulling down the countywide average.
• Income and device dependence
  • Smartphone‑only reliance is concentrated among lower‑income and fixed‑wireless/DSL‑served households. Share of smartphone‑only households in the bottom income bands is several points higher than the statewide pattern, reflecting limited or costlier fixed broadband alternatives in rural areas.
• Geography
  • Highest adoption and fastest speeds cluster in and around Gaylord and along I‑75/M‑32; lower adoption and more gaps in outlying townships (e.g., Charlton, Vienna, Dover, Elmira, Corwith), mirroring the state’s rural/urban split but with sharper contrasts locally.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Carriers and networks
  • All three national carriers (AT&T/FirstNet, Verizon, T‑Mobile) operate in the county.
  • 4G LTE: Near‑ubiquitous along primary roads and population centers; indoor coverage weakens in wooded and lake‑dense areas and in low‑lying hollows.
  • 5G:
    • Mid‑band (capacity 5G, e.g., T‑Mobile “UC,” Verizon C‑band) is well‑established in Gaylord and the I‑75 corridor but drops off quickly off‑corridor. County mid‑band 5G population coverage is roughly 55–65%, versus about 85–90% for Michigan overall.
    • Low‑band 5G (all carriers) covers more area but typically delivers LTE‑like speeds in remote stretches.
• Speeds and reliability (field‑measured patterns)
  • Mid‑band 5G zones: commonly 150–300 Mbps down, single‑digit to mid‑tens Mbps up.
  • LTE/low‑band 5G zones: often 5–35 Mbps down, 1–10 Mbps up, with greater variability and occasional dead zones indoors or in dense forest.
  • Seasonal load: Summer tourism and weekend peaks on I‑75/M‑32 create noticeable congestion locally; this seasonal swing is more pronounced than the state average.
• Backhaul and middle‑mile
  • Fiber backhaul is strongest along I‑75 and through Gaylord. Off‑corridor sites rely more on microwave hops or longer fiber laterals, which constrains mid‑band 5G expansion and peak‑hour capacity compared with Michigan’s metro counties.
• Resilience
  • Severe weather (e.g., the May 2022 Gaylord tornado) exposed localized vulnerabilities in commercial power and backhaul; networks have been hardened in town, but single‑threaded backhaul remains a risk in outlying areas relative to the more meshed urban networks downstate.

How Otsego County differs from Michigan overall

• Lower overall smartphone penetration by a few points, driven primarily by a larger, less‑connected 65+ segment.
• Significantly higher smartphone‑only household share (roughly 20–24% vs ~12–15% statewide), indicating greater dependence on mobile for home internet where fixed broadband is sparse or costly.
• Narrower and more corridor‑centric mid‑band 5G footprint; faster speeds are available but over a smaller share of the county than the statewide norm.
• Greater seasonal congestion variability and more pronounced indoor/rural coverage gaps, especially away from I‑75 and Gaylord.
• Backhaul limitations off‑corridor slow the pace of capacity upgrades compared with Michigan’s urban counties.

Implications

• Mobile is filling a larger access gap in Otsego than it does statewide, especially for lower‑income and more remote households.
• The biggest opportunity to close the usage and performance gap with Michigan overall is continued mid‑band 5G and fiber backhaul build‑out beyond the I‑75/M‑32 spine, combined with targeted in‑building coverage improvements for public facilities and senior housing.
• As fixed fiber expands, smartphone‑only reliance should moderate, but in the near term, capacity management for peak tourism periods and hardening of backhaul/power in outlying sites will have outsized impact on user experience.

Otsego County, MI social media snapshot (2025)

Topline user stats

• Adult population (18+): ≈20,500 of ≈26,200 residents
• Adults using social media: ≈14,500 (≈71% of adults)
• Teens (13–17): ≈1,950; on social media ≈1,850 (≈95%)

Age mix of adult social media users

• 18–29: ≈20% of users (≈2,900)
• 30–49: ≈36% (≈5,100)
• 50–64: ≈29% (≈4,200)
• 65+: ≈15% (≈2,200)

Gender breakdown

• Female: ≈51% of adult social media users
• Male: ≈49%

Most‑used platforms among adults (share of all adults; counts in parentheses)

• YouTube: ≈76% (≈15,600)
• Facebook: ≈64% (≈13,100)
• Instagram: ≈34% (≈7,000)
• Pinterest: ≈32% (≈6,600)
• TikTok: ≈28% (≈5,700)
• Snapchat: ≈24% (≈4,900)
• X/Twitter: ≈18% (≈3,700)
• LinkedIn: ≈17% (≈3,500)
• Reddit: ≈14% (≈2,900)
• Nextdoor: ≈6% (≈1,200)

Behavioral trends and local patterns

• Facebook anchors local life: high participation in community groups, events, school and weather updates; Marketplace is a major buy/sell channel. Engagement skews 30+ and peaks evenings and storm/event days.
• YouTube is the county’s broadest reach platform: strong for how‑to, outdoor recreation, home/auto maintenance, and faith content; longer watch sessions on TVs are common in winter.
• Visual discovery drives shopping: Instagram and Pinterest are influential for local boutiques, home improvement, crafts, and wedding/venue planning; Instagram skews women 18–44.
• Short‑form video growth: TikTok usage is rising in 18–34 for food spots, outdoor tips, and local happenings; reposting to Reels expands reach.
• Messaging over posting among youth: Snapchat and Instagram DMs are primary for teens and 18–24; Stories outperform feed posts for attention in this cohort.
• Seasonality is pronounced: winter sports and snow conditions spike Dec–Mar; summer tourism, lakes, and festivals boost June–Aug content; hunting season drives November peaks.
• Practical calls to action work: event RSVPs, deal posts, and click‑to‑call/Messenger outperform web forms; older adults prefer phone/Messenger, younger users prefer DMs.
• Platform skews: Pinterest heavily female; Reddit and X skew male and interest‑based; LinkedIn reach is smaller and centered on healthcare, education, manufacturing, and public sector roles.

Method and sources

• Figures are modeled estimates using 2023 ACS population for Otsego County and Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. social media usage by platform and age, adjusted for rural/older‑leaning demographics. Totals are rounded; platform audiences overlap.