Tuscola County

Tuscola County, Michigan – key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 53,323 (2020 Census)
• 2023 population estimate: ~52,700 (about a 1–2% decline since 2020)

Age

• Under 5 years: ~5%
• Under 18 years: ~22%
• 65 years and over: ~22%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Racial/ethnic composition

• White alone: ~95%
• Black or African American alone: ~1%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~0.6%
• Asian alone: ~0.4%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~4%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~92%

Household data

• Households: ~21,700 (ACS 2018–2022)
• Persons per household: ~2.5
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate: ~84%

Insights

• The county has a modestly declining population and an older age profile, with roughly one in five residents 65+.
• Demographic composition is predominantly non-Hispanic White, with relatively small but present multiracial and Hispanic populations.
• Household size is typical for rural Michigan, and high owner-occupancy indicates a stable, homeowner-heavy housing market.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey; 2023 Population Estimates Program)

Tuscola County, MI (pop. ~53,300) has an estimated 42,000–43,000 active email users.

Age distribution of email users (share using email in each cohort):

• 13–17: ~2,900 users (≈90% of ~3,200 teens)
• 18–29: ~6,800 (≈98%)
• 30–49: ~12,400 (≈97%)
• 50–64: ~11,900 (≈93%)
• 65+: ~8,800 (≈82%)

Gender split among email users mirrors the population: ~51% female, ~49% male.

Digital access and usage:

• Households: ~21,000–22,000; ~75–80% have a broadband subscription (≈16,000–17,500 households), and ~85–90% have a computer or smartphone.
• Smartphone-only internet households: ~10–12% (≈2,100–2,600), implying mobile-first email for a notable minority.
• Daily email checking aligns with national rural norms (roughly two-thirds to three-quarters of adult users).

Connectivity and density facts:

• Population density ~58 people/sq mi; settlement concentrated in small towns (e.g., Caro, Vassar, Cass City) with cable/fiber in town centers and fixed wireless/legacy DSL more common in outlying areas.
• At least baseline broadband (25/3 Mbps) is widely available; 100/20 Mbps coverage is substantial in town areas and growing via ongoing rural fiber builds.
• Trend: rising fiber and fixed-wireless availability since 2020, shrinking reliance on DSL, improving reliability and email access countywide.

Mobile phone usage in Tuscola County, Michigan — 2024 snapshot

Headline trends vs Michigan

• Smartphone ownership is a few points lower than the state average, and mobile-only internet reliance is notably higher than Michigan overall.
• 5G is present but concentrated in towns and along state highways; large agricultural areas remain dominated by low-band 5G and LTE, yielding lower capacity than the state average.
• Prepaid/MVNO usage and Android share skew higher than statewide norms, consistent with rural, price-sensitive markets.

User base and adoption (estimates grounded in recent federal and national research)

• Population baseline: 53,300 (2020 Census). Adults 18+: about 41,600.
• Any mobile phone (feature phone or smartphone): about 39,000–40,000 adult users (≈94–96% of adults).
• Smartphone users: about 34,000–36,000 adults (≈82–86% of adults). This is several points below Michigan’s statewide adult smartphone adoption (≈88–90%).
• Mobile-only home internet: approximately 18–21% of households rely on smartphones/mobile data as their primary home internet (vs ≈12–14% statewide). In Tuscola’s roughly 21,000–22,000 households, that equates to about 3,800–4,500 households.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Age structure (older than Michigan overall) moderates smartphone adoption:
  • 18–29: ≈6,900 residents; smartphone ownership ≈95–96% → about 6,600 users.
  • 30–49: ≈12,800 residents; ≈92–95% → about 12,000–12,200 users.
  • 50–64: ≈11,200 residents; ≈80–85% → about 9,000–9,500 users.
  • 65+: ≈10,700 residents; ≈58–65% → about 6,200–6,900 users.
• Income and plan mix: Lower median household income than the Michigan average corresponds with higher take-up of prepaid and MVNO plans and longer device replacement cycles, diverging from the more postpaid-centric, flagship-device profile in urban Michigan.
• Mobile-only and data-saving behaviors: Higher share of households without wired broadband drives heavier use of smartphone hotspots, fixed wireless home internet, and data-cautious app behavior (e.g., Wi‑Fi offload, lower video bitrates) than in metro counties.
• Work and sector specifics: Agriculture, trades, and logistics contribute to elevated use of messaging, PTT-like apps, and telematics in-field; seasonal population flows and farm operations shape coverage expectations along rural roads rather than dense neighborhoods.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Networks present: AT&T (including FirstNet), Verizon, and T‑Mobile serve the county; multiple MVNOs are active. UScellular presence is limited compared with northern/western Michigan.
• 5G footprint:
  • Town centers and highway corridors (e.g., near Caro, Vassar, Cass City; along M‑15, M‑24, M‑46, M‑81) have consistent 5G, including mid-band in select areas (notably on T‑Mobile).
  • Outlying agricultural tracts see low-band 5G or LTE, with lower capacity and larger cell footprints; indoor coverage variability is higher than statewide norms, especially in metal-roofed structures and wooded zones.
• Performance: Typical download speeds cluster lower than Michigan metro medians; mid-band 5G can exceed 100 Mbps in-town, while many rural LTE/low-band 5G areas operate in the few tens of Mbps, with uplink often in single digits. This gap vs statewide performance is most pronounced during peak hours.
• Home-broadband substitutes:
  • Fixed wireless (5G Home) from T‑Mobile and, in select footprints, Verizon is available in and around towns and along some corridors, easing pressure where cable/fiber are absent.
  • Cable is available in town cores (e.g., Xfinity/Comcast in parts of Caro and other population centers); legacy DSL persists in rural zones.
  • Regional providers: Thumb Electric Cooperative is deploying fiber in portions of the Thumb, and Air Advantage operates fixed wireless and fiber backhaul in the region—both materially affect mobile offload and indoor experience where available.
• Coverage pain points: Dead spots persist in low-density farm areas and near tree lines; capacity can be constrained around events and during harvest/transit peaks. This differs from the state’s more uniform suburban coverage.

How Tuscola differs from Michigan overall

• Adoption: Adult smartphone adoption is roughly 3–6 points lower than the state, primarily due to an older age profile and rural settlement patterns.
• Access: The share of mobile-only households is several points higher than the Michigan average, reflecting gaps in wired broadband and driving heavier reliance on smartphones and fixed wireless for home connectivity.
• Network quality: 5G availability is more “islanded” (towns/highways) and capacity tails off faster outside cores than in Michigan’s metro counties.
• Market mix: Greater prevalence of prepaid/MVNO plans and budget Android devices; device turnover is slower than in suburban/urban Michigan.

Method and basis

• Population and household counts: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; ACS patterns for rural Michigan).
• Smartphone and mobile adoption rates by age and community type: Pew Research Center (2023) and rural vs urban differentials applied to local age structure.
• Coverage and infrastructure patterns: FCC/National Broadband Map updates (2023–2024), national carrier public coverage disclosures, and known regional providers (Thumb Electric Cooperative fiber initiatives; Air Advantage fixed wireless/fiber presence in the Thumb).
• Estimates combine these sources to produce county-specific counts and percentages; ranges reflect the spread between rural and statewide adoption and the mix of age cohorts in Tuscola County.

Social media usage in Tuscola County, Michigan (2024–2025, modeled profile)

How this was built

• County-level social media data are not directly published. Figures below model Tuscola County adults (18+) using the county’s age/gender structure from the U.S. Census Bureau (ACS) and platform adoption rates from Pew Research Center 2024. Percentages are shares of adults; counts are estimates.

Population base

• Total population: ~52,000
• Adults (18+): ~41,000

Overall usage

• Adults using at least one social platform: ~83% of adults ≈ 34,000 users

Most-used platforms (share of adults; estimated local reach)

• YouTube: ~83% ≈ 34,000
• Facebook: ~68% ≈ 28,000
• Instagram: ~47% ≈ 19,000
• Pinterest: ~35% ≈ 14,000
• TikTok: ~33% ≈ 13,500
• Snapchat: ~30% ≈ 12,000
• WhatsApp: ~29% ≈ 11,900
• LinkedIn: ~30% ≈ 12,000
• X (Twitter): ~22% ≈ 9,000
• Reddit: ~22% ≈ 9,000
• Nextdoor: ~16% ≈ 6,500

Age-group profile (adoption patterns applied locally; share of each age group)

• 18–29: YouTube ~95%; Instagram ~76%; Snapchat ~65%; TikTok ~62%; Facebook ~57%
• 30–49: YouTube ~92%; Facebook ~75%; Instagram ~59%; TikTok ~39%; Snapchat ~28%
• 50–64: Facebook ~73%; YouTube ~83%; Instagram ~35%; TikTok ~18%
• 65+: Facebook ~62%; YouTube ~60%; Instagram ~15%; TikTok ~8%

Gender breakdown (directional differences consistent with rural U.S. patterns)

• Women: Higher on Facebook and Pinterest (Pinterest roughly half of women vs ~1 in 5 men nationally); strong Instagram/TikTok among 18–34.
• Men: Higher on YouTube; overrepresented on Reddit, X/Twitter, and LinkedIn.
• Overall social media adoption is broadly similar by gender; differences show up by platform.

Behavioral trends (rural Michigan counties, Tuscola included)

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, school and high‑school sports updates, churches, township/county notices, and Marketplace drive the most engagement.
• Video-first consumption: Short vertical clips (Reels/TikTok) outperform photos for discovery; YouTube drives deeper how‑to content (DIY, farming, auto/home repair, outdoor).
• Messaging: Snapchat and Facebook Messenger dominate among teens/young adults; WhatsApp use is modest and family‑centric.
• Instagram is the go‑to for local boutiques, salons, food trucks, and venues; Reels markedly outperform static posts.
• X/Twitter use is niche, concentrated in weather alerts and Detroit/college sports.
• Peak engagement windows: weekday early mornings (6–8 a.m.) and evenings (7–10 p.m.); late Saturday mornings for Facebook/Instagram.
• Community groups and buy/sell pages are major reach multipliers; content tied to local schools, fairs, or landmarks gets outsized shares/comments.
• Ads: Facebook/Instagram deliver the broadest local reach at the lowest CPM; YouTube yields strong completed views at higher CPV; TikTok excels for under‑35 reach.

Sources

• U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (age/gender structure for Tuscola County)
• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024 (platform adoption and age/gender breakouts)