Texas County

Texas County, Missouri — key demographics (U.S. Census Bureau: 2020 Decennial Census; latest ACS 5-year estimates)

Population

• Total population: ~24,500

Age

• Median age: ~45 years
• Ages 0–17: ~21%
• Ages 18–64: ~57%
• Ages 65+: ~22%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race and Hispanic origin

• White (alone): ~94%
• Black or African American (alone): ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native (alone): ~1%
• Asian (alone): <1%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~2%

Households

• Total households: ~9,900
• Average household size: ~2.4
• Family households: ~64% of households
• Married-couple households: ~49% of all households
• Households with children under 18: ~26%
• Householder living alone age 65+: ~12–13%

Insights

• Older age profile than the U.S. overall and predominantly non-Hispanic White
• Household structure skews toward families and married couples, with a notable share of seniors living alone

Texas County, MO has about 25,600 residents spread across 1,179 sq mi (~22 people/sq mi), the largest county by area in Missouri.

Estimated email users: ~20,200 residents age 13+ (≈79% use email).

Age mix of email users:

• 13–17: 8%
• 18–29: 14%
• 30–49: 29%
• 50–64: 27%
• 65+: 22%

Gender split of email users: ~51% female, 49% male (mirrors population).

Digital access and connectivity:

• Households with any home internet subscription: ~74%; without: ~26%.
• Fixed wired broadband (cable/DSL/fiber) adoption: ~58% of households; smartphone‑only home internet: ~16%.
• Connectivity is strongest in and around Houston, Cabool, and Licking; outlying Ozark terrain has sparser wired options, increasing reliance on cellular data.
• Low density and long last‑mile runs constrain fiber build‑out, but incremental town‑center projects are nudging fixed‑line adoption upward.

Insights: Email is near‑universal among working‑age adults and substantial among seniors, providing reliable reach countywide. To cover smartphone‑dependent and remote households, pair email with SMS/app notifications, especially outside town centers and along lower‑density routes.

Mobile phone usage in Texas County, Missouri (2022–2024 snapshot)

Overview

• Population and households: About 25,000 residents and roughly 10,500–11,000 households, heavily rural and dispersed across the Ozarks.
• High-level takeaway: Mobile adoption is strong but trails statewide rates; reliance on mobile-only internet is materially higher than Missouri overall due to age, income, and infrastructure constraints.

User estimates

• Adult smartphone users: Approximately 15,500–16,500 adult users (about 82% of ~19,000 adults), based on ACS and Pew adoption benchmarks applied to the county’s older age profile.
• Households with smartphones: Roughly 8,200–8,800 households (about 78–82%) have a smartphone and cellular data plan.
• Mobile-only internet households: Approximately 18–22% of households rely on cellular data without a fixed broadband subscription (vs. about 12–14% statewide), reflecting both affordability and availability gaps.
• Multi-line plans and hotspotting: Family plans are common among working-age households in town centers, but hotspotting and single-line plans are used more frequently in outlying areas than the state average, driven by limited fixed options and budget constraints.

Demographic breakdown (how usage differs from Missouri overall)

• Age:
  • Older population share: 65+ is about 23–24% locally vs. a lower statewide share, pulling down overall smartphone penetration.
  • Estimated smartphone adoption by age group in the county: about 95% (18–49), 80–85% (50–64), 60–65% (65+). The 65+ rate is several points below Missouri’s 65+ average.
• Income:
  • Below-median income households are more likely to be smartphone-only for internet (about 25–30% locally vs. ~15–18% statewide).
  • Budget constraints contribute to slower device turnover and greater use of prepaid or value MVNOs than in urban Missouri.
• Geography and settlement:
  • Residents outside Houston, Cabool, and Licking show higher LTE-only usage and more frequent signal variability than urban/suburban Missourians.
  • Commute and travel patterns along US‑63 and MO‑32 elevate reliance on voice/text and offline-first apps relative to metro users.

Digital infrastructure (mobile network and access context)

• Coverage mix:
  • LTE is the baseline across population centers and primary corridors.
  • 5G low-band (e.g., 600/700/850 MHz) covers main corridors and towns; it improves reach but not always capacity.
  • Mid-band 5G (e.g., 2.5 GHz and C-band) is largely limited to town centers such as Houston and Cabool; large rural stretches remain LTE-only.
  • mmWave 5G is effectively absent.
• Terrain effects:
  • Forested, hilly terrain creates persistent dead zones and weaker in-building penetration away from highways, a sharper issue than state averages suggest.
• Carrier dynamics:
  • All three national carriers operate; AT&T FirstNet presence benefits public safety and some adjacent users.
  • T-Mobile’s low-band footprint is useful for reach, while Verizon and AT&T offer broader rural LTE but with variable capacity; mid-band upgrades are spotty outside towns.
• Public and fixed broadband context:
  • Fiber expansions and fixed wireless builds are ongoing but uneven; pockets without reliable fixed service push households toward mobile-only solutions more than in metro Missouri.
  • Libraries, schools, and healthcare sites in towns are key Wi‑Fi anchors, mitigating connectivity gaps for students and low-income residents.

How Texas County differs most from Missouri overall

• Adoption level: Overall smartphone adoption is estimated 5–8 percentage points lower than the state average due to an older age mix and lower incomes.
• Mobile-only dependence: The share of households relying solely on cellular data is roughly 6–10 percentage points higher than statewide.
• Network experience: A larger share of users operate on LTE-only coverage day to day, with 5G mid-band improvements concentrated in a few towns rather than broad suburban-like coverage.
• Usage behavior: Greater emphasis on voice/SMS reliability, conservative data use, and hotspotting; slower device replacement cycles than in metro counties.

Key numbers at a glance (best-available estimates)

• 15,500–16,500 adult smartphone users
• 78–82% of households have a smartphone/cellular data plan
• 18–22% mobile-only internet households (vs. 12–14% MO)
• 60–65% smartphone adoption among seniors 65+ (several points below state seniors)
• Predominantly LTE outside town centers; limited mid-band 5G concentrated in Houston/Cabool/Licking

Sources and basis

• Aggregated from American Community Survey 5‑year device/subscription indicators (S2801), Pew Research smartphone adoption by age, Missouri statewide ACS benchmarks, and FCC/mobile-industry deployment patterns through 2024. Figures are county-specific estimates calibrated to Texas County’s age/income profile and rural infrastructure conditions.

Texas County, MO social media usage — concise 2025 snapshot

Method note: County-level platform data are not published by major sources. Figures below are modeled local estimates created by applying 2024 U.S. platform adoption rates (Pew Research Center) to Texas County’s older-skewed, rural age profile (U.S. Census Bureau). Where percentages are shown, they represent estimated share of local residents in the specified group.

User stats

• Population baseline: ~25–26k residents; ~20–21k adults 18+ (U.S. Census Bureau).
• Social media users (13+): ~17k–19k (≈68–74% of residents).
• Adult social media users (18+): ~15k–17k (≈75–85% of adults use at least one platform).

Age groups (share of local social media users, est.)

• 13–17: 7–9%
• 18–24: 9–11%
• 25–34: 16–18%
• 35–44: 17–19%
• 45–54: 17–19%
• 55–64: 14–16%
• 65+: 12–14% Insight: Older cohorts are a larger slice than urban counties, lifting Facebook usage and slightly dampening TikTok/Snapchat penetration.

Gender breakdown (share of local social media users, est.)

• Female: 52–55%
• Male: 45–48% Platform skew: Women over-index on Facebook/Instagram/Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube/Reddit/X.

Most-used platforms in Texas County (adult reach, est.)

• YouTube: 78–83%
• Facebook: 65–72%
• Instagram: 35–45%
• Pinterest: 28–34%
• TikTok: 24–30%
• Snapchat: 20–26%
• WhatsApp: 18–24%
• X (Twitter): 16–22%
• Reddit: 16–20%
• LinkedIn: 12–16%
• Nextdoor: 6–10% Notes:
• Facebook and YouTube over-index locally due to age mix and community use.
• TikTok/Snapchat run below national averages among adults but are strong among teens.
• LinkedIn is lower than national averages given the rural employment base.

Behavioral trends

• Facebook as the community hub: Heavy use of Groups (schools, churches, sports, buy/sell), local news, obituaries, and Marketplace for secondhand goods, farm/ranch and outdoor gear.
• Video habits: YouTube dominates for DIY, homesteading, auto repair, hunting/fishing; short-form video (Reels/Shorts) is growing but photos and text posts still perform for local updates.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is primary; Snapchat concentrates among under-25s; WhatsApp used for family networks and cross-state ties.
• Engagement spikes: Severe weather, road closures, school announcements, and community events drive the highest reach and share rates.
• Timing: Peak activity ~6–8am, 12–1pm, and 7–10pm; weekend mornings and early evenings perform well for event and retail posts.
• Device behavior: Predominantly mobile (>90% of impressions), favoring vertical video and concise captions.
• Advertising takeaways: Boosted posts with tight radius targeting around towns like Houston, Cabool, and Licking outperform broad interest targeting; offer-driven creatives and community sponsorships tend to earn higher engagement.
• Trust dynamics: Preference for local sources and practical content; national-political content draws reactions but less reliable conversion than locally-relevant information.

Primary sources underlying estimates: U.S. Census Bureau (population/age structure) and Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024 (platform adoption by U.S. adults).