Pike County

Pike County, Mississippi — key demographics

Population size

• 2020 Census: 40,324
• Recent trend: modest decline since 2010; 2023 Census estimate roughly high-39,000s

Age structure

• Median age: ~38–39 years
• Under 18: ~24%
• 18–64: ~59%
• 65 and over: ~17%

Gender

• Female: ~52%
• Male: ~48%

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census; Hispanic is any race)

• Black/African American: ~53%
• White: ~43%
• Hispanic/Latino: ~2–3%
• Two or more races: ~2%
• Asian: ~0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.3%

Households and families

• Households: ~15,000
• Average household size: ~2.5–2.6
• Family households: ~65–66% of households
• Married-couple families: ~38–40% of households
• Nonfamily households: ~34–35%
• One-person households: ~30%
• Households with children under 18: ~28%

Insights

• Majority Black county with a stable White minority and small but growing Hispanic population.
• Slight population decline and gradual aging; females outnumber males.
• Household sizes are moderate, with about two-thirds of households being family households.

Pike County, MS population is about 40,300 (2020 Census), roughly 100 residents per square mile, concentrated around McComb–Summit–Magnolia. Estimated email users: 31,000–33,000 (≈77–82% of residents), based on rural Mississippi internet adoption and the near‑universal use of email among internet users.

Age profile (share of residents using email): 13–24: ~93%; 25–44: ~95%; 45–64: ~88%; 65+: ~68%. Approximate share of total email users by age: 19% (13–24), 33% (25–44), 30% (45–64), 18% (65+).

Gender split among email users mirrors local demographics: ~52% female, 48% male.

Digital access and connectivity:

• Home broadband subscription rate: ~63–68% of households; 20–25% are smartphone‑only internet users.
• Stronger fixed‑line and 4G/5G coverage along I‑55/US‑98 (McComb area); more reliance on mobile hotspots and satellite in outlying tracts.
• Libraries, schools, and municipal Wi‑Fi are meaningful access points for students and seniors.

Trends: Email remains the primary digital identifier for government, healthcare, and retail logins. Growth in email use is fastest among adults 45+ (telehealth/benefits portals). Mobile‑first behavior dominates; most residents check email on smartphones, driving shorter subject lines, reliance on push notifications, and evening/early‑morning peak opens.

Pike County, Mississippi: mobile usage summary with county-specific estimates, demographic context, and infrastructure, emphasizing what differs from statewide patterns

Population and household baseline (for scaling)

• Population: roughly 40,000 residents
• Households: about 15,000–16,000
• Adult population (18+): approximately 31,000–32,000

Mobile user estimates in Pike County

• Adult smartphone users: about 26,000–28,000 adults (roughly 83–87% of adults), reflecting high smartphone adoption typical of lower-income, rural counties that lean mobile-first
• Total mobile lines (adults plus teens): approximately 33,000–36,000 active lines, given multi-line family plans and >1 line per person for some users
• Smartphone-only internet households (no fixed home broadband): approximately 3,500–4,000 households (around 22–26% of households), above the Mississippi average and well above the U.S. average, driven by cost sensitivity and patchy fixed-broadband outside McComb and the I-55 corridor
• Wireless-only phone households (no landline): majority of households; Pike County is likely at or above the already-high Mississippi rate due to cost and mobility preferences

Demographic breakdown and implications for usage

• Age: older share is sizable (mid- to high teens percent 65+), but Pike skews younger than many rural MS peers because of McComb’s employment and services hub; youth and working-age segments drive heavy app-based and prepaid usage
• Race/ethnicity: roughly half Black and about half White, with small Hispanic/Latino and other groups; this mix, combined with income distribution, corresponds to higher-than-average prepaid penetration, hotspot use for homework, and smartphone-as-primary device patterns seen in similar MS counties
• Income and affordability: median household income below the state median and a higher poverty rate than the MS average; this is associated with:
  • Greater reliance on prepaid and MVNO plans
  • More smartphone-only homes
  • Slower upgrade cycles for devices, with extended use of LTE-capable phones alongside low-band 5G

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• Macro coverage: all three national carriers provide solid highway and town coverage; coverage is strongest along I-55, US-98, and in/around McComb, Summit, and Magnolia
• 5G availability:
  • Low-band 5G: broadly available countywide (good reach, modest speeds)
  • Mid-band 5G: concentrated around McComb and the I-55 corridor; far less consistent in rural southern and eastern parts of the county
• Capacity and performance:
  • In-town median speeds typically sufficient for HD streaming and telehealth; rural edges experience larger drops into LTE with lower uplink performance, affecting video calls and uploads
  • Peak-time congestion is noticeable around retail clusters in McComb and along I-55 exits, with performance dips during weekday evenings and weekend afternoons
• Fixed broadband backstop:
  • Cable broadband is present in McComb and a few adjacent areas, but fiber and cable footprints thin out quickly in rural tracts
  • Where fixed options are limited or costly, households commonly use unlimited or high-cap cellular plans and phone hotspots for home connectivity

How Pike County’s trends differ from Mississippi overall

• Higher smartphone-only reliance: Pike’s smartphone-only household share is meaningfully higher than the state average, reflecting more limited rural fixed-broadband choices and stronger cost pressures
• More prepaid and MVNO usage: Pike over-indexes on prepaid and value plans relative to the statewide mix, with correspondingly lower average revenue per user and tighter data budgeting behaviors
• Coverage quality gap by geography: the in-town/rural performance gap is wider than the statewide pattern; once off the main corridors, users fall back to LTE more often and see larger uplink drops than the Mississippi average
• Device mix and upgrade cadence: older devices and LTE holdouts are more common than state average, which tempers realized 5G speeds even where mid-band is available
• Use cases: heavier reliance on mobile for schoolwork, streaming, and telehealth than the state average, and more frequent hotspotting in multi-student households

Key takeaways for planners and providers

• Mobile is the primary internet on-ramp for a larger share of Pike County residents than for Mississippi overall; improving mid-band 5G reach outside McComb would materially raise real-world speeds and uplink quality
• Affordability levers (ACP replacements, prepaid-friendly 5G plans, bundled hotspot allowances) will move adoption more than flagship-device promotions
• Fixed–wireless access (FWA) over mid-band 5G has outsized potential in Pike County’s fringe areas where cable/fiber are absent, but will require careful sector capacity planning to avoid peak-time slowdowns

Notes on methodology

• User counts are derived by applying current U.S. smartphone adoption ranges and rural Mississippi usage patterns to Pike County’s adult and household base. County demographics and infrastructure patterns indicate higher smartphone-only and prepaid reliance than Mississippi overall, and the estimates reflect that uplift. Where exact county-level measurements are not published uniformly, direction and magnitude are anchored to ACS, FCC mapping patterns, and observed rural-MS differentials through 2024.

Pike County, MS social media snapshot (2024)

Baseline

• Population: 40,324 (2020 Census). Adults (18+): ~30,700.

Overall usage

• Adults using at least one social platform: 79% (24,300 people).
• Smartphone-first usage dominates (~90%+ of social access), with heavier reliance on mobile data in rural areas.

Most-used platforms among adult residents (share of the adult population; monthly use, estimated)

• YouTube: 72% (~22,100)
• Facebook: 64% (~19,700)
• Instagram: 32% (~9,800)
• TikTok: 28% (~8,600)
• Snapchat: 22% (~6,700)
• Pinterest: 20% (~6,100)
• X (Twitter): 12% (~3,700)
• LinkedIn: 10% (~3,100)
• Reddit: 8% (~2,500)
• Nextdoor: 3% (900)

Age-group patterns (share using social media; platform skews)

• Teens 13–17: 93%. Heavy on TikTok (70%) and Snapchat (65%); Instagram (60%); Facebook under 30%.
• 18–29: 95%. YouTube (90%+), Instagram (75%), TikTok (60–65%), Snapchat (55–60%), Facebook (55%).
• 30–49: 87%. Facebook (70%+) and YouTube (80%+); Instagram (45%); TikTok (~30–35%).
• 50–64: 74%. Facebook (65–70%), YouTube (70%); Instagram (20–25%); TikTok (~15–20%).
• 65+: 56%. Facebook (50%+), YouTube (~45–50%); limited Instagram/TikTok.

Gender breakdown (adults; platform skews)

• Women: ~81% on social. Over-index on Facebook and Pinterest (Pinterest ~30%+ of women); strong Instagram/TikTok engagement for shopping, local events, schools, and churches.
• Men: ~76% on social. Over-index on YouTube, X, and Reddit; strong interest in sports, auto/DIY, hunting/fishing content.

Behavioral trends and local patterns

• Facebook as the community hub: High engagement in Groups (churches, schools, youth sports, civic alerts) and Marketplace (buy/sell/trade). Local news consumption is concentrated in Facebook Pages and Groups.
• Video-first consumption: YouTube for long-form (music, sermons, DIY, repair); TikTok/Instagram Reels for short-form highlights (high school sports, food, hair/beauty, local events). Live streams of games and church services draw spikes.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is the default for local businesses and community coordination; SMS remains prevalent with older residents.
• Peak activity windows: Evenings (6–9 p.m.), with weekend surges tied to sports, festivals, and church activities. Lunchtime mini-peaks on weekdays.
• Commerce: Strong response to practical, hyperlocal content—before/after photos, limited-time offers, and appointment links for services (auto repair, lawn care, hair/beauty). Facebook boosts with tight radius targeting perform best; TikTok expands awareness among 18–34.
• Trust dynamics: Content from known local figures (pastors, coaches, school admins, small-business owners) outperforms polished “out-of-town” creative. Closed groups feel safer for older users.
• Access considerations: Pockets of limited home broadband persist; creators and advertisers should optimize for mobile data (short, compressed video; captions; clear CTAs; phone-call options).

Notes on methodology

• Counts and percentages are 2024 estimates for Pike County derived from the county’s age mix and rural-South usage patterns aligned to recent Pew Research platform adoption data and ACS/Census demographics. Figures represent “at least monthly” use and allow multi-platform overlap.