Clark County

Clark County, Missouri — key demographics (latest available; primarily 2019–2023 ACS 5‑year; population count from 2020 Census)

• Population: 6,634 (2020 Census)
• Age
  • Median age: ~43
  • Under 18: ~22–23%
  • 18–64: ~57–58%
  • 65 and over: ~20–21%
• Gender
  • Male: ~50%
  • Female: ~50%
• Race and ethnicity (percent of total)
  • White (alone): ~95%
  • Black or African American (alone): ~1%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native (alone): ~0.3–0.5%
  • Asian (alone): ~0.2%
  • Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (alone): ~0%
  • Two or more races: ~2–3%
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2%
• Households
  • Total households: ~2,700–2,800
  • Average household size: ~2.3–2.4
  • Family households: ~65%
  • Married-couple households: ~50–55%
  • With children under 18: ~25–30%
  • Nonfamily households: ~35%
  • Living alone (65+): ~12–14%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2019–2023 American Community Survey (5‑year estimates) and 2020 Decennial Census.

Clark County, Missouri snapshot (estimates)

• Population: ~6,600; ~2,700 households; density ~13 people per sq. mile (very rural).
• Estimated email users: 3,900–4,400 residents. Method: adults ≈ 78% of population; rural internet adoption ≈ 80–85%; ~90% of internet users use email (Pew/ACS benchmarks).

Age distribution of email users

• 13–17: ~5–7%
• 18–34: ~20–25%
• 35–64: ~45–55% (largest share, driven by work/commerce needs)
• 65+: ~18–25% (lower adoption but rising)

Gender split

• Approximately even (49–51% each), reflecting similar email use by men and women.

Digital access and trends

• Broadband subscription: roughly 70–80% of households (ACS-type rural range), with 10–15% smartphone‑only and 15–25% lacking home internet.
• Growth in fiber and fixed wireless is improving speeds near town centers; older adults and low‑income households lag in adoption.
• Mobile access is a key fallback for farms and dispersed homes; public Wi‑Fi (libraries/schools) supplements access.

Local connectivity context

• As a low‑density county, service is strongest in and around Kahoka and along main corridors; coverage becomes spottier in outlying areas, affecting consistent email access.

Below is a county-level snapshot built from recent Census/ACS population counts, Pew mobile adoption benchmarks (adjusted for rural areas), FCC coverage patterns, and Missouri broadband program notes. Exact, device-level counts aren’t published for Clark County; figures are reasoned estimates with ranges.

Overview

• Clark County is small, rural, and aging, with patchy wireline broadband. Mobile connectivity is widely used for both voice and internet, with higher reliance on mobile as the primary home connection than Missouri overall.

User estimates

• Population and households
  • Residents: ~6.6–6.8k; adults (18+): ~5.0–5.2k; households: ~2.6–2.8k.
• Mobile phone owners (any mobile)
  • Adults with a mobile phone: ~85–90% → ~4.3–4.7k people.
• Smartphone users
  • Adults with a smartphone: ~78–85% (rural-adjusted) → ~4.0–4.4k adults.
  • Teens (13–17) with smartphones: ~90–95% of ~400–450 teens → ~360–430.
  • Total smartphone users (adults + teens): ~4.4–4.8k.
• Cellular data plan in the home
  • Households with a cellular data plan: ~60–68% → ~1.6–1.9k households (statewide tends to be low-70s; Clark likely 5–10 points lower).
• Mobile-/smartphone-only internet
  • Adults who rely on smartphones as their only home internet: ~20–25% → ~1.0–1.3k adults (higher than statewide).
• Wireless-only voice (no landline)
  • Households wireless-only: roughly mid-60s to low-70s percent (on par or slightly lower than state due to older residents).

Demographic breakdown (how usage differs from Missouri’s pattern)

• Age
  • Older share is higher than state average; smartphone ownership among seniors trails the state by several points. Expect notably lower smartphone adoption in 65+ and somewhat lower in 55–64.
• Income
  • Median household income is below the Missouri median. That correlates with:
    • Higher use of prepaid/MVNO plans.
    • More smartphone-only internet users (cost and limited wired options).
• Education
  • Lower bachelor’s attainment than state average; more basic-use patterns (voice, text, Facebook, messaging apps) and less multi-device/home-network use.
• Race/ethnicity
  • County is predominantly White; racial gaps seen statewide are less visible locally. The bigger divide is geographic (town centers vs outlying areas) and by age/income.

Digital infrastructure points

• Coverage and technology
  • 4G LTE is common in towns and along highways (US‑136, US‑61), but indoor coverage can be inconsistent between towns and in river bottoms/wooded areas.
  • 5G availability skews to low-band (AT&T/Verizon) with mid-band pockets mainly along major corridors (T‑Mobile), so speeds vary widely.
• Capacity and towers
  • Roughly a dozen macro cell sites likely serve the county’s ~500 square miles, yielding wider spacing and more dead zones than urban Missouri. Capacity can dip during peak hours or events.
• Fixed Wireless Access (FWA)
  • T‑Mobile 5G Home Internet is available around Kahoka, Wayland, and along major routes; Verizon 5G/LTE Home may be spotty and location-dependent. Service eligibility fluctuates with tower load.
• Wireline backhaul/fiber
  • Fiber-to-the-home exists in limited pockets via local incumbents/co-ops; many locations still rely on legacy DSL or have no viable wired option, reinforcing mobile dependence.
• Border dynamics
  • Proximity to Iowa/Illinois means cross-border roaming and network handoffs are common near Alexandria, Wayland, and river corridors, affecting user experience.

Key ways Clark County differs from Missouri overall

• More mobile reliance for home internet: smartphone-only and FWA use are higher than the state norm.
• Slightly lower overall smartphone penetration, driven mainly by a larger senior share.
• More prepaid/MVNO adoption due to lower incomes and limited wired alternatives.
• Less consistent 5G performance; mid-band 5G is less prevalent and capacity is more variable.
• Coverage gaps between towns persist more than in much of the state.

Notes on method and sources

• Population/households from recent Census/ACS; mobile ownership from Pew Research (2023) adjusted for rural counties; cellular plan and smartphone-only tendencies aligned with ACS S2801 patterns and rural broadband literature; infrastructure points synthesized from FCC coverage maps, carrier buildouts, and Missouri broadband program updates. Ranges reflect county size, rural variation, and the absence of granular public device counts.

Clark County, MO social media snapshot (modeled estimates; based on Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. usage plus rural Midwest demographics)

Population context

• Residents: ~6,600–6,800; older and more rural than U.S. average, with broadband adoption below metro levels. This typically shifts usage toward Facebook/YouTube and lowers Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat penetration.

Estimated user base

• Adults using any social media: ~3,900–4,200 (about 75–80% of adults).
• Including teens 13–17, total users likely ~4,300–4,600.

Age mix of adult users (share of adult social users)

• 18–29: ~15–20%
• 30–49: ~30–35%
• 50–64: ~25–30%
• 65+: ~20–25% Note: Older tilt raises Facebook/YouTube share and lowers TikTok/Snapchat.

Gender breakdown (share of adult social users)

• Women: ~52–55% overall; overrepresented on Facebook and Pinterest.
• Men: ~45–48% overall; overrepresented on YouTube, X (Twitter), Reddit.
• Nonbinary/other: small but present; no reliable local estimate.

Most-used platforms (estimated share of Clark County adults)

• YouTube: ~65–75%
• Facebook: ~60–70% (Facebook Groups and Marketplace are central)
• Instagram: ~25–35%
• Snapchat: ~20–30% (concentrated among teens/20s)
• TikTok: ~20–30%
• Pinterest: ~25–35% (skews female)
• X (Twitter): ~12–18%
• LinkedIn: ~10–15% (lower due to local industry mix)
• Reddit: ~10–15%
• Nextdoor: <5% (limited coverage in rural areas)

Behavioral trends

• Community-first: Heavy use of Facebook Groups for school sports, churches, local government updates, yard/estate sales, and lost-and-found; Marketplace is a go-to for buy/sell/trade.
• Local info and events: Strong engagement with county fair updates, weather/road conditions, hunting seasons, and ag-related content; posts from known locals or organizations carry outsized trust.
• Messaging over posting (younger users): Snapchat and Instagram DMs for daily coordination; visible posts are more curated/highlight-oriented.
• Video is for learning/entertainment: YouTube used for how‑to, equipment repair, home/land projects, and local sports clips; upload activity is lighter than consumption.
• Timing: Engagement peaks evenings and weekends; mobile-first usage.
• Ads that work: Facebook/Instagram geotargeting with simple creative, short video, phone-call CTAs, and clear local value (e.g., same-day service, local pickup).

Notes on method and limits

• Figures are modeled from Pew Research Center’s 2023–2024 U.S. platform adoption, with rural and age-structure adjustments using ACS-style demographics for small Missouri counties. True county-level platform stats aren’t published; treat percentages as informed estimates and use platform ad tools or a short local survey to validate.