Dawson County

Here’s a concise demographic snapshot of Dawson County, Nebraska (U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2019–2023 5-year estimates; rounded):

Population

• Total population: ~24,300
• Median age: ~36
• Age distribution: Under 18 (28%), 18–64 (56%), 65+ (~16%)

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive)

• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~33%
• Non-Hispanic White: ~58%
• Non-Hispanic Black: ~1–2%
• Non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1%
• Non-Hispanic Asian: ~1%
• Non-Hispanic Two or more/Other races: ~5–6%

Households

• Total households: ~8,600
• Average household size: ~2.8
• Family households: ~69% of households
• Married-couple families: ~52% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~37–38%
• Nonfamily households: ~31%
• Householders living alone (65+): ~10% of households

Dawson County, NE snapshot (estimates)

• Population and density: 24,000 residents across ~1,013 sq mi (24 people/sq mi). Users concentrated in Lexington, Cozad, and Gothenburg along I‑80.
• Estimated email users: 17,000–19,000 residents (age 13+) use email at least monthly.
• Age mix of email users:
  • 13–24: ~30% (heavy mobile use; email secondary to messaging)
  • 25–44: ~35% (work/school-driven email)
  • 45–64: ~25%
  • 65+: ~10% (lower but rising adoption)
• Gender split: roughly even; slight male tilt countywide (~51% male, 49% female) reflected among users.
• Digital access trends:
  • Household broadband subscriptions roughly 75–85%; an estimated 10–15% are mobile‑only.
  • Stronger fixed broadband and 4G/5G along the I‑80 corridor; speeds/reliability drop in outlying rural areas north/south of the corridor.
  • Public libraries and schools provide important Wi‑Fi/computer access; many residents are smartphone‑first for checking email, while older adults rely more on desktops.
  • Ongoing fiber and fixed‑wireless buildouts are gradually improving rural connectivity.

Notes: Figures are derived from ACS population, rural broadband patterns, and Pew email adoption benchmarks; treat as directional.

Dawson County, NE – mobile phone usage summary (focus: what differs from statewide patterns)

Headline user estimates (2024–2025, modeled from ACS population, rural adoption benchmarks, and age-adjusted smartphone rates)

• Population baseline: roughly 24,000 residents; about 16,500–17,000 adults (18+).
• Mobile phone users: about 17,000–19,000 residents use a mobile phone (roughly 70–80% of total population; 90%+ of adults).
• Smartphone users: about 15,000–17,000 (roughly 80–88% of adults; high among teens, lower among seniors).
• Mobile-only home internet: approximately 2,000–2,500 households rely primarily on mobile data (roughly one-fifth to one-quarter of households), higher than the Nebraska statewide average.
• Prepaid vs. postpaid: prepaid share likely meaningfully higher than the state average (estimate: high-20s to mid-30s percent of active lines), reflecting price sensitivity and a larger bilingual/migrant workforce.

Demographic breakdown (key differences from the state)

• Age
  • Teens (12–17): very high smartphone penetration (≈90%); heavy use of OTT messaging and video; similar to state but with greater mobile-only home internet reliance for schoolwork in some households.
  • Working-age adults (18–54): near-saturation smartphone use (≈90%+), but with a higher tilt to budget Android devices and prepaid/MVNO plans than statewide.
  • Seniors (65+): smartphone adoption lower than the state average (by several points), with some basic-phone persistence; coverage gaps outside towns contribute to cautious upgrading.
• Ethnicity/language
  • A substantially larger Hispanic/Latino population than the Nebraska average supports higher bilingual usage, greater reliance on WhatsApp and other cross-border messaging/calling, and a higher prevalence of prepaid lines and family-shared data plans.
• Income/occupation
  • Agriculture and meat-processing shift work increase demand for reliable service in and around plants, feedlots, and along commuting corridors; device replacement cycles are a bit longer than statewide, and refurbished devices are more common.

Digital infrastructure and performance (what stands out locally)

• Coverage shape
  • I-80/Platte River corridor (Lexington, Cozad, Gothenburg): strong 4G LTE and generally available low-band 5G from national carriers; mid-band 5G capacity is most likely in and near these towns.
  • Outside town centers (south of I-80 and between towns): more variable signal quality and occasional dead zones along section roads; farmsteads may rely on boosters or fixed wireless.
• Capacity and backhaul
  • Fiber backhaul is best along I-80; performance degrades more quickly with distance from the corridor compared with the statewide experience in the more urbanized east (Omaha/Lincoln).
• Fixed broadband interplay
  • Towns have cable/fiber options; rural areas lean on fixed wireless and mobile hotspots. As a result, Dawson shows a higher mobile-only household share than the Nebraska average.
• Public safety and resilience
  • FirstNet/public-safety LTE coverage is present along the highway and in towns; off-corridor incident response still contends with patchier coverage compared with eastern Nebraska counties.

Trends that differ from Nebraska statewide

• Higher prepaid line share and mobile-only home internet reliance.
• More bilingual messaging/voice patterns tied to cross-border family ties.
• Greater town-versus-country performance gap: town cores see acceptable 5G; rural roads/fields fall back to weaker LTE or spotty coverage more often than the state average.
• Slightly lower senior smartphone adoption and slower upgrade cycles.
• Network improvements tend to follow the I-80 corridor first; capacity upgrades arrive later off-corridor than in eastern population centers.

Notes and how to validate

• Use recent ACS for population/age mix; FCC National Broadband Map for fixed and mobile coverage; carrier maps and independent tests (Ookla, OpenSignal) for 5G layers; OpenCelliD/local permitting for tower siting. The figures above are estimates intended to frame planning and should be refined with local school district hotspot counts, carrier business sales data, and county 911/FirstNet coverage checks.

Below is a concise, planning-oriented snapshot. Exact county-level social media figures aren’t publicly reported; percentages are modeled from Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S./rural benchmarks and adjusted for Dawson County’s rural profile and significant Hispanic/Latino population. Use as directional guidance.

Overall usage

• Adult social media penetration (modeled): 65–72% of adults use at least one platform.
• Device mix: Mobile-first; short-form video and messaging are primary touchpoints.

Most-used platforms (share of adults using each platform, modeled)

• YouTube: 75–83%
• Facebook: 60–70%
• Instagram: 35–45%
• TikTok: 25–35%
• Snapchat: 25–35% (concentrated under 30)
• Pinterest: 30–40% (skews female)
• WhatsApp: 25–40% (likely higher locally due to Hispanic/Latino adoption)
• X (Twitter): 15–25%
• LinkedIn: 15–25%

Age group patterns

• Teens (13–17): Heavy Snapchat and TikTok; YouTube ubiquitous; Instagram for peers/sports.
• 18–29: Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat lead; YouTube daily; Facebook mainly for groups/events.
• 30–49: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Instagram moderate; Marketplace and local groups are key.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube first; growing TikTok consumption; Pinterest for projects/recipes.
• 65+: Facebook for family/church/community updates; YouTube for news/how‑tos.

Gender breakdown (tendencies)

• Overall users: roughly even male/female.
• Platforms skew female: Facebook (slight), Instagram (slight), Pinterest (strong).
• Platforms skew male: YouTube (slight), Reddit (strong), X (moderate).
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp used by both; WhatsApp more common among Hispanic users.

Local behavioral trends to note

• Hyperlocal content performs best: school and high‑school sports, weather alerts, local news, church/faith community updates, community events, public safety, and agriculture.
• Facebook usage is functional: Groups (buy/sell/trade, school boosters, community boards), Marketplace (autos, farm/ranch equipment, home goods), and Events.
• Video is king: Short-form Reels/Shorts/TikToks for quick updates; YouTube for how‑to (equipment repair, DIY, hunting/fishing, cooking). Include Spanish-language clips where relevant.
• Messaging for service: Residents often DM businesses via Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp for hours, quotes, and appointments.
• Language: Bilingual (English/Spanish) content increases reach and engagement.
• Timing: Morning (6–8 a.m.), lunch (11:30 a.m.–1 p.m.), and evening (7–10 p.m.) see higher engagement; weekends for events and Marketplace.
• Trust signals: Faces of local owners/staff, partnerships with schools/boosters, and user-generated content outperform polished, “national” creative.
• Ad tips: Geo-target by ZIPs around Lexington, Gothenburg, Cozad; mix English/Spanish creative; optimize for video views and message objectives; retarget Marketplace and video engagers.

Sources and method notes

• Pew Research Center (2023–2024) national and rural social media/platform adoption; U.S. Census/ACS for rural demographic context.
• Figures above are modeled estimates for Dawson County’s rural composition; treat as directional, not official counts.