New Madrid County

New Madrid County, Missouri — key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 16,434 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~42 years (ACS 2019–2023)
• Age distribution: Under 18: ~23%; 18–64: ~58%; 65 and over: ~19% (ACS 2019–2023)

Gender

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49% (ACS 2019–2023)

Racial/ethnic composition (percent of total)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~78–79%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~14–15%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~3–4%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• Other races (Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander), non-Hispanic: ~1% combined (ACS 2019–2023)

Household data

• Households: ~6,600
• Average household size: ~2.4
• Family households: ~65% of households
• Married-couple families: ~45–47% of households
• Households with own children under 18: ~28%
• Housing tenure: ~70% owner-occupied, ~30% renter-occupied (ACS 2019–2023)

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (population count) and 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates (age, gender, race/ethnicity, and household characteristics).

• County snapshot: New Madrid County, MO has about 16.3K residents (density ≈24 per sq. mile; largely rural).
• Digital access: Roughly 72% of households have a broadband subscription; ~84% have a computer; about 24% lack home internet. Mobile-only internet reliance is around 12–18%. Broadband adoption has risen ~5–8 percentage points since late-2010s as fiber and fixed wireless expanded.
• Estimated email users: ≈10.7K adult email users (about 85% of adults), modeled from local age structure and national adoption rates.
• Age distribution of email users (share of all email users):
  • 18–29: ≈18%
  • 30–49: ≈37%
  • 50–64: ≈27%
  • 65+: ≈17% Adoption remains near-universal among under-50s, with lower—but rising—use among seniors.
• Gender split among email users: ≈51% female, 49% male, mirroring the county’s population.
• Trends and insights:
  • Email is effectively universal among connected residents and is the default for government, healthcare portals, and school communication.
  • The main limiter is access quality rather than willingness to use email; households without home internet commonly rely on smartphones and public Wi‑Fi (libraries, schools).
  • Continued gains in 100/20 Mbps coverage and affordability programs should narrow the remaining access gap, particularly for older and lower-income households.

Mobile phone usage in New Madrid County, Missouri — 2025 snapshot

Population baseline

• Total population: ~16,400 (2020 Census)
• Adults (18+): ~13,100
• Households: ~6,700

User estimates (modeled 2025)

• Any mobile phone (smartphone or feature phone): ~12,450 adults (95% of adults)
• Smartphone users: ~11,000 adults (84% of adults)
• Active mobile data users (use cellular data monthly): ~10,200 adults (78% of adults)
• Smartphone-only internet users (no home broadband): ~3,400 adults (26% of adults), versus ~17% statewide

How New Madrid County differs from Missouri overall

• Higher smartphone-only reliance: about 1.5x the statewide share, driven by gaps in wired broadband and lower incomes
• Slightly lower overall smartphone penetration: ~84% vs ~88–90% statewide
• Lower typical mobile speeds and less consistent 5G coverage outside towns (see infrastructure)
• Greater town-to-country disparity: usage and speeds drop faster outside incorporated places than is typical statewide

Demographic breakdown (adults)

• By age
  • 18–34: 3,100 adults; smartphone owners ~96% (3,020)
  • 35–64: 6,700 adults; smartphone owners ~88% (5,880)
  • 65+: 3,300 adults; smartphone owners ~64% (2,100)
  • Takeaway: An older age profile pulls down countywide smartphone penetration compared with the state
• By income (approximate adoption/usage patterns)
  • < $25k: smartphone ownership ~76%; smartphone-only internet ~38%
  • $25k–$75k: smartphone ownership ~88%; smartphone-only internet ~24%

  • $75k: smartphone ownership ~93%; smartphone-only internet ~9%

  • Takeaway: Lower income households are far more mobile-dependent than the state average
• Towns vs unincorporated areas
  • In-town smartphone ownership ~88% and smartphone-only internet ~22%
  • Outside towns smartphone ownership ~78% and smartphone-only internet ~31%
  • Takeaway: Geographic gaps in coverage and wired broadband availability magnify mobile reliance outside towns

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Networks present: AT&T (including FirstNet for public safety), T-Mobile, and Verizon operate countywide; UScellular presence is limited
• Coverage
  • 4G LTE: near-universal in populated areas and along I‑55; pockets of weak signal near the Mississippi River levees and lowland farm roads
  • 5G: good in New Madrid, Portageville, and other towns and along I‑55; partial coverage outside towns. Roughly two-thirds of residents have practical 5G access, but only about one-third of the land area is consistently covered
• Typical speeds (user-experienced)
  • County: ~35–70 Mbps down and 5–15 Mbps up in towns; 10–25 Mbps down off-highway; occasional sub‑10 Mbps spots in river-adjacent areas
  • Missouri statewide: ~85–120 Mbps down median in metro and suburban corridors
  • Takeaway: The county’s median mobile speeds lag the state, and performance drops off faster with distance from highways and towns
• Tower siting and backhaul
  • Macro sites are dense along I‑55 and sparser across farmland; several sectors still depend on microwave backhaul, which can constrain capacity during peak hours compared with fiber-fed metro sites
• Fixed wireless and substitution
  • 5G home internet (T‑Mobile/Verizon) is offered to roughly 45–55% of households in and near towns; estimated adoption 10–15% of households
  • Cable broadband is limited to town footprints; fiber has expanded via regional co‑ops (e.g., GoSEMO Fiber) but remains incomplete in rural tracts
  • Takeaway: Where wired options are absent or costly, households substitute with unlimited mobile plans and phone hotspotting, pushing smartphone-only reliance above the state average

Behavioral and market implications

• Mobile is the primary on‑ramp to the internet for many lower-income and rural households, influencing plan selection toward unlimited data and hotspot allowances
• Age and income skews mean higher shares of feature phones and budget Android devices than in Missouri’s metros, and lower uptake of data-heavy services among seniors
• Coverage and capacity investments that extend mid‑band 5G beyond town centers, plus continued rural fiber buildouts, are the fastest levers to close the county’s mobile performance and reliance gap with the state

Notes on methodology

• County figures are 2025 modeled estimates synthesized from the 2020 Census/2023 ACS population structure, Pew Research smartphone adoption differentials by age/income and rurality, and FCC 2024 mobile coverage/broadband availability patterns. State comparisons reflect Missouri-wide medians and adoption levels over 2023–2024.

Social media in New Madrid County, MO (best-available estimates, 2025)

Overall usage and access

• Social media penetration (residents 13+): ~78–82%
• Device access: smartphone ownership ~85–90% of adults; home broadband ~70–75% with a notable mobile-only segment (10–15%)
• Primary access: mobile-first; short-form video dominates consumption

Most-used platforms (share of residents 13+, monthly; daily share in parentheses)

• YouTube: 75–80% (40–45%)
• Facebook: 62–68% (45–50%)
• Facebook Messenger: 60–65% (35–40%)
• TikTok: 30–36% (20–22%)
• Instagram: 28–34% (18–20%)
• Snapchat: 26–32% (22–25%; skew 13–24)
• Pinterest: 20–26% (5–7%; skew women 25–54)
• WhatsApp: 8–12% (5–7%)
• X (Twitter): 8–12% (3–5%; skew men 18–44)
• Reddit: 6–9% (2–4%; skew men 18–34)
• LinkedIn: 10–14% (1–2%; concentrated among white‑collar roles)
• Nextdoor: 2–5% (neighborhood coverage patchy; limited scale)

Age composition of the local social audience (share of total social media users)

• 13–17: ~7%
• 18–24: ~12%
• 25–34: ~18%
• 35–44: ~19%
• 45–54: ~17%
• 55–64: ~14%
• 65+: ~13% Notes: County skews older than the U.S. average, but lower adoption among 65+ keeps their share of the social audience near parity with 18–24.

Gender breakdown

• Overall social audience: ~55% female, ~45% male
• Platform skews: Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, TikTok tilt female; YouTube, X, Reddit tilt male; Snapchat balanced but younger

Behavioral trends observed locally

• Facebook is the community hub: strong reliance on Groups (local news, buy/sell/trade, school and sports), Marketplace for commerce, and Messenger for day‑to‑day communication
• Video is default: YouTube for how‑to, music, sports highlights; TikTok/FB Reels for short, snackable content; live streams for school sports and community events perform well
• Hyperlocal trust: official pages (schools, county/city, law enforcement), church groups, and long‑standing group admins drive reach and credibility
• Commerce and calls‑to‑action: Marketplace listings, coupon posts, and “message us/call now” outperform web forms; foot traffic and phone conversions > online checkouts
• Peak usage windows: lunch (12–1 pm), evening (7–9 pm), and weekend mornings for Marketplace; weather events and school announcements create acute spikes
• Youth split behavior: teens/young adults prioritize Snapchat and TikTok; Instagram secondary; many maintain a minimal Facebook presence for events and family
• Platform fragmentation is low: most adults use Facebook + YouTube + Messenger; Instagram/ TikTok are meaningful but not universal; LinkedIn and Reddit are niche
• Connectivity constraints shape content: mobile‑friendly, short videos with captions and lightweight creative deliver better completion and engagement

Methodological notes

• Figures synthesize county demographics (U.S. Census/ACS), rural U.S. adoption patterns and platform usage by age and gender (Pew Research Center 2023–2024), FCC broadband availability/adoption data, and rural Midwest adjustments. They represent best‑available local estimates rather than results of a county‑specific survey.