Itawamba County Local Demographic Profile

Itawamba County, Mississippi — key demographics

Population size

  • 23,863 (2020 Census)

Age

  • Median age: ~41 years (ACS 2019–2023)
  • Under 18: ~23%
  • 18 to 64: ~59%
  • 65 and over: ~18%

Gender

  • Female: ~50–51%
  • Male: ~49–50%

Racial/ethnic composition (2020 Census; Hispanic is any race, others are non-Hispanic)

  • White: ~86.5%
  • Black or African American: ~6.0%
  • American Indian and Alaska Native: ~0.6%
  • Asian: ~0.3%
  • Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander: ~0.0%
  • Some other race: ~0.4%
  • Two or more races: ~3.6%
  • Hispanic/Latino (of any race): ~2.6%

Households (ACS 2019–2023)

  • Total households: ~9,200
  • Average household size: ~2.5
  • Family households: ~67% of households; average family size ~3.0
  • Married-couple households: ~54%
  • Households with children under 18: ~28%
  • Householder living alone: ~27% (about 12% 65+ living alone)
  • Housing tenure: ~81% owner-occupied, ~19% renter-occupied

Insights

  • Small, slowly growing rural county (~24k people).
  • Older age profile than the U.S. overall, with roughly 1 in 6 residents 65+.
  • Predominantly non-Hispanic White, with small Black and Hispanic populations.
  • High owner-occupancy and family-oriented household structure with modest household size.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates.

Email Usage in Itawamba County

  • Scope: Itawamba County, Mississippi (population 23,863; land area ≈533 sq mi; density ≈45 people/sq mi, 2020 Census).
  • Estimated email users: ≈14,900 adults (≈62% of total residents), derived by applying Pew U.S. email adoption rates to the county’s age mix.
  • Gender split among users: ≈51% female, 49% male (mirrors county population).
  • Age distribution of email users (share of users):
    • 18–34: ≈29%
    • 35–54: ≈36%
    • 55–64: ≈17%
    • 65+: ≈18%
  • Digital access and usage context:
    • ≈80% of households have an internet subscription.
    • ≈72% have fixed broadband (cable/DSL/fiber); ≈12% are smartphone‑only connections.
    • Email adoption is highest among 18–54 (≈88–90% of adults in these groups use email) and lower among 65+ (≈63%), reflecting access and comfort gaps.
  • Local density/connectivity facts:
    • The county is predominantly rural with residents concentrated in and around Fulton and Mantachie, which correlates with slightly lower fixed-broadband adoption than the U.S. average.
    • Electric‑cooperative fiber builds and incumbent cable upgrades since 2020, plus broad 4G/5G coverage along major corridors, are steadily improving speeds and availability, supporting continued growth in email use among previously under‑served rural households.

Mobile Phone Usage in Itawamba County

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Itawamba County, Mississippi

Scope and method

  • Definitive figures are provided where publicly established (for example, total population and infrastructure entities). User counts are derived estimates based on the 2020 Census population for Itawamba County plus national/rural adoption rates from major research series (e.g., Pew Research Center for smartphone and cellphone adoption by age; CDC/NHIS for wireless-only telephony; ACS for household internet patterns). Estimates are rounded and intended to reflect 2024 conditions.

Headline findings

  • Population baseline (definitive): 23,863 residents (2020 Census).
  • Estimated adult mobile users (any cellphone): about 17,600 adults use a mobile phone of some kind.
  • Estimated adult smartphone users: about 15,300.
  • Smartphone-only (cellular-only) home internet households: roughly 2,200 households, reflecting a sizable but not majority share of households relying on cellular data as their primary home connection.
  • Infrastructure note (definitive): All four major operators active in Mississippi serve the county (AT&T/FirstNet, Verizon, T-Mobile, C Spire). The local electric cooperative (Tombigbee Electric Power Association) operates Tombigbee Fiber, an FTTH network present in the county.

How the estimates were derived

  • Adults in county: applying a typical adult share of 77% to the 2020 Census population yields about 18,400 adults.
  • Cellphone ownership (any): applying a rural cellphone ownership rate near the national rural norm (~95–96%) produces about 17,600 adult mobile users.
  • Smartphone ownership: applying rural smartphone adoption (~80–85%, weighted by age) gives roughly 15,300 adult smartphone users.
  • Household smartphone-only internet: estimating around 9,200 households (population divided by typical Mississippi household size) and applying a rural South “cellular-only at home” share in the mid-20% range yields roughly 2,200 such households.

Demographic breakdown of mobile use (estimates)

  • By age (reflecting Itawamba’s older age structure relative to the state):
    • 18–34: ~4,800–5,000 adults; smartphone adoption ~95–96% → roughly 4,600–4,800 smartphone users.
    • 35–64: ~9,100 adults; smartphone adoption ~85–90% → roughly 7,800–8,200 smartphone users.
    • 65+: ~4,200 adults; smartphone adoption ~60–65% → roughly 2,500–2,700 smartphone users.
  • By income and device dependence:
    • Lower-income households are more likely to be smartphone-only for home internet and to use prepaid mobile plans; this share in Itawamba is higher than in Mississippi’s larger metros but moderated by the availability of cooperative fiber (see below).
  • By race/ethnicity:
    • The mobile user base mirrors the county’s population composition (majority White with smaller Black and Hispanic communities). Adoption differentials are driven more by age and income than by race in this county.

Digital infrastructure and coverage (definitive points and conservative characterizations)

  • Operators present: AT&T (including FirstNet public-safety network), Verizon, T-Mobile, and C Spire Wireless operate in and around Itawamba County.
  • 5G/LTE footprint: 4G LTE is the baseline across populated corridors; 5G low-band service is broadly available along I-22/US-78 and around Fulton, with mid-band 5G more limited and denser near towns and highways; coverage thins in sparsely populated or wooded areas typical of the Tombigbee waterway and hill country.
  • Fiber-to-the-home: Tombigbee Fiber (run by Tombigbee Electric Power Association) has built FTTH across much of the county footprint, materially improving fixed broadband availability compared with many rural Mississippi counties without cooperative fiber builds.
  • Backhaul and tower siting: Macrocells cluster along I-22/US-78, MS-25, and near Fulton; terrain and low population density create pockets of weaker indoor signal away from these corridors, necessitating carrier aggregation/low-band spectrum for reach.

How Itawamba differs from Mississippi statewide

  • Lower reliance on cellular-only home internet than similarly rural counties without co-op fiber: Because Tombigbee Fiber has extended FTTH into small towns and rural roads, Itawamba residents have better fixed-broadband options than many rural Delta and Pine Belt counties. This reduces smartphone-only dependency relative to those areas, even though cellular-only remains meaningfully above metro Mississippi levels.
  • Older age profile than the state average leads to:
    • Slightly lower smartphone penetration than Mississippi’s urban counties.
    • Higher persistence of basic/feature-phone use among seniors.
  • Network performance patterns differ from statewide urban norms:
    • Daytime traffic concentrates along I-22 and around Fulton/educational and healthcare hubs, while many parts of the county experience low-load but lower-signal conditions; this contrasts with Jackson–Gulf Coast corridor counties where 5G mid-band density is higher and indoor performance more uniform.
  • Plan mix and upgrade cycles:
    • A higher share of value/prepaid plans and longer device replacement cycles than in urban Mississippi, but less extreme smartphone-only dependence than in rural counties without fiber.

Key takeaways for planning and outreach

  • Mobile user base is broad (roughly three-quarters of all residents are adult mobile users) with a solid smartphone majority; however, age and income create pockets of lower smartphone use and heavier reliance on basic plans.
  • Continued buildout of cooperative fiber is a defining local advantage, making Itawamba’s digital-inclusion challenges more about affordability and device/skills than about pure access, in contrast to many Mississippi counties where access gaps still dominate.
  • Improving indoor coverage and mid-band 5G infill beyond the I-22 corridor, plus targeted senior adoption programs, would yield outsized gains compared with statewide one-size-fits-all approaches.

Social Media Trends in Itawamba County

Social media snapshot for Itawamba County, Mississippi (concise, 2024 estimates grounded in Pew Research Center U.S. usage and the county’s age/gender mix from Census/ACS; figures rounded)

Population base

  • Total residents: ≈23.9k (2020 Census). Adults 18+: ≈18.4k. Teens 13–17: ≈1.5k.
  • Gender: ~51% female, ~49% male.

Overall usage

  • Adults using at least one major platform: ~80% (≈14.7k adults).
  • Teens (13–17) using at least one platform: ~95% (≈1.45k teens).

Most‑used platforms (estimated share of adults; platform adoption)

  • YouTube: ~80% of adults (broadest reach; ≈14.7k).
  • Facebook: ~65% (≈12.0k).
  • Instagram: ~35% (≈6.4k).
  • TikTok: ~30% (≈5.5k).
  • Pinterest: ~28% (≈5.2k; majority female).
  • Snapchat: ~25% (≈4.6k).
  • X/Twitter: ~20% (≈3.7k).
  • Reddit: ~15% (≈2.8k).
  • LinkedIn: ~12% (≈2.2k; limited B2B/niche use).

Age patterns

  • Teens (13–17): YouTube (95%), TikTok (67%), Instagram (62%), Snapchat (60%), Facebook (~30%); low usage of X/Reddit/LinkedIn.
  • 18–29: Heavy video and short‑form (YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat); Facebook used but not primary.
  • 30–49: Mixed stack with Facebook (groups, Marketplace) + YouTube; Instagram moderate; TikTok growing.
  • 50–64: Facebook dominant; YouTube strong; Pinterest meaningful; Instagram/TikTok lighter.
  • 65+: Facebook leads; YouTube for news/how‑to; minimal elsewhere.

Gender notes

  • Facebook: slight female skew in posting and group engagement; male and female reach both high.
  • Pinterest: predominantly female (crafts, recipes, home, events).
  • TikTok/Instagram: slight female skew; strong among under‑35 women.
  • YouTube: near‑universal; modest male skew in sports/DIY/tech.
  • Reddit/X: modest male skew; niche audiences.

Behavioral trends and local context

  • Community-first: Facebook Groups and Pages drive school updates, church activities, booster clubs, civic info, lost-and-found, and storm/wildfire updates. Buy/sell/trade and Marketplace are very active.
  • Video consumption: YouTube for how‑to, equipment repair, home projects, hunting/fishing, sports highlights; TikTok/Instagram Reels for short local content, events, and small‑business promos.
  • Youth messaging: Snapchat is the default for teens and college‑age; Instagram DMs/TikTok comments secondary.
  • Trust and news: Local events, obituaries, and high‑school sports coverage circulate primarily via Facebook; older adults rely on this more than other platforms.
  • Shopping path: Discovery on Facebook/Instagram and TikTok; conversion often via Messenger, cash apps, or in‑person pickup; Pinterest influences planning (weddings, holidays, home updates).
  • Timing: Engagement peaks evenings (6–10 p.m.) and weekends; weather events and Friday night sports create spikes.

Practical takeaways

  • To reach 30+: Lead with Facebook (Groups + Marketplace) and YouTube; add Pinterest for women 25–54.
  • To reach under‑30: TikTok + Instagram + Snapchat; short vertical video and creator collaborations perform best.
  • For broad reach: YouTube pre‑roll + Facebook feed and Group placements cover most adults; layer Instagram for visual storytelling.

Sources and method

  • U.S. Census/ACS for Itawamba County population and age/gender mix (2020–2023).
  • Pew Research Center (2023–2024) platform adoption by U.S. adults and teens; rural adjustments applied to reflect county context. Figures are county‑level estimates derived from these benchmarks, rounded for clarity.