Broome County

Broome County, NY — key demographics

Population

• Total: 198,683 (2020 Census). 2023 estimate: about 196–197k.

Age

• Median age: ~40
• Under 18: ~19%
• 18–64: ~62%
• 65 and over: ~19%

Sex

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49%

Race and ethnicity (ACS 5-year estimates)

• White alone: ~82%
• Black or African American alone: ~7%
• Asian alone: ~6%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Hispanic/Latino (of any race): ~4–5% (Note: Hispanic/Latino overlaps with race categories.)

Households (ACS 5-year estimates)

• Total households: ~80,000
• Average household size: ~2.3
• Family households: ~59–60%; nonfamily: ~40–41%
• One-person households: ~33%; 65+ living alone: ~12–13%
• Homeownership rate: ~57–58%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 5-year estimates (most recent available).

Broome County, NY — email usage snapshot

• Estimated users: 130,000–140,000 adults. Basis: ~196k residents (2023), ~78% adults, and ~85–90% of adults using email (national adoption adjusted for local access).
• Age adoption (approx.):
  • 18–29: 95–98%
  • 30–49: 94–97%
  • 50–64: 90–93%
  • 65+: 80–88%
• Gender split: Near parity; email usage mirrors population (~51% female, ~49% male).
• Digital access trends:
  • Broadband: Mid-80s percent of households subscribe to broadband; adoption lower in rural towns, higher in the Binghamton–Vestal–Johnson City core.
  • Mobile-first: An estimated 10–15% of households rely primarily on smartphones for internet access.
  • Public access: Libraries and municipal Wi‑Fi (e.g., downtown Binghamton, campuses) provide free connectivity; high student presence (Binghamton University ~18k+ students) boosts daily email engagement.
  • Network upgrades: New York’s ConnectALL and carrier 5G buildouts are expanding coverage and speeds; gaps persist on the county’s rural fringes.
• Local density/connectivity facts:
  • Population density ~280 people/sq mi overall; far higher in the urban core along I‑81/Route 17.
  • University and healthcare corridors have robust fiber and Wi‑Fi, supporting high email usage during work/school hours.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Broome County, NY (focus on differences vs statewide)

How the estimates were built

• County context: ~196–200k residents, with an older age profile than the state overall and a large university population centered in Binghamton/Johnson City/Endicott.
• Method: Applied national/state smartphone ownership rates by age and income (e.g., Pew Research for adults; national teen access rates), then adjusted modestly downward for upstate/rural patterns and upward for the large student segment. Infrastructure points reflect carrier-published coverage maps and typical upstate deployment patterns as of 2024.

User estimates

• Unique mobile phone users (all devices): roughly 160k–175k residents.
• Smartphone users: roughly 145k–160k residents.
• Compared with New York State:
  • Penetration among adults is likely 2–4 percentage points lower than the statewide average due to older age and lower median income than downstate.
  • Teen smartphone access is high and similar to statewide, but the university population pushes heavy data use in and around campus even if overall penetration is slightly lower than the state.

Demographic breakdown (expected patterns)

• Age
  • 18–29 (large student presence): near-universal smartphone ownership and heavy 5G/data use; this sub-group is higher than the upstate average and more like statewide/NYC levels.
  • 30–49: high ownership, broadly in line with the state.
  • 50–64 and 65+: lower smartphone adoption than statewide, widening the county–state gap by a few points.
• Income/plan type
  • Higher share of prepaid and budget brands (e.g., Cricket, Metro, Visible, Boost) than New York State overall, reflecting income mix outside the university core.
  • “Mobile-only” internet households (relying on a cellular data plan instead of home broadband) are likely several points higher than the statewide share, landing in the mid‑teens percentage of households versus low‑teens statewide.
• Urban vs rural within the county
  • Binghamton/Johnson City/Endicott: near-complete 4G LTE and broad 5G availability; higher device churn and newer handsets driven by students and healthcare workers.
  • Outlying towns: slightly lower smartphone adoption and more basic/voice-first usage; more reliance on low-band 5G/LTE because of terrain and tower spacing.

Digital infrastructure points (what’s on the ground)

• Coverage and technology
  • 4G LTE is effectively ubiquitous in the urban core and along I‑81 and NY‑17/I‑86.
  • 5G low-band covers most populated areas; mid-band 5G (faster) concentrates in Binghamton/Johnson City/Endicott and along major corridors. Rural hills and river valleys can drop to LTE or show spotty 5G, especially indoors.
  • Compared with statewide, mid-band 5G density and small-cell deployment are lighter than downstate metros, so average 5G speeds and capacity are lower and more variable.
• Carriers/market texture
  • Legacy strength of Verizon in upstate NY; AT&T broadly present; T‑Mobile has expanded low-band and mid-band along corridors and in the urban core. Competitive conditions are closer to other Southern Tier counties than to NYC/Long Island.
  • More macro towers per capita than downstate but far fewer small cells; “dozens” of macro sites line the I‑81 and NY‑17/I‑86 corridors and ridge lines, with microwave and fiber backhaul primarily tied to highway and rail rights-of-way.
• Terrain/building effects
  • River-valley topography and older masonry buildings in downtown Binghamton can produce indoor coverage variability, a bigger factor than in flatter/downstate suburban markets.
• Public safety and resiliency
  • E911 wireless location is standard; text-to-911 is increasingly common in NY counties, but county-specific availability should be confirmed locally. Backup power at key macro sites exists but is not as dense as in downstate urban grids.

Key ways Broome differs from New York State overall

• Slightly lower adult smartphone penetration (older population, lower income outside the student core).
• Higher share of prepaid plans and mobile-only internet households.
• Heavier, campus-driven data peaks around the university and medical centers despite lower penetration countywide.
• Less dense mid-band 5G and small-cell buildout than downstate; speeds/capacity vary more by neighborhood and terrain.
• More pronounced rural dead zones and indoor shadowing, especially away from the I‑81/NY‑17 corridors.

Notes and data sources to consult for validation or refinement

• Pew Research Center (smartphone ownership by age/income), FCC mobile coverage maps (4G/5G layers), carrier coverage portals, ACS/NTIA for household internet and “cellular data plan” reliance, county planning/EMO for tower siting and Text-to-911 status, and Binghamton University reports for campus population and Wi‑Fi/mobile offload context.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot for Broome County, NY. Exact county-level social media data aren’t published; figures are estimates based on Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform usage, adjusted to Broome’s demographics (incl. the large Binghamton University student population) and recent national trends.

Headline user stats

• Population: ~198,000; adults (18+): ~158,000
• Adults using at least one social platform: ~130,000–140,000 (≈82–88% of adults)
• Gender among adult social users (approx.): 52% women, 48% men (mirrors county demographics)

Most-used platforms (share of adults using; estimated)

• YouTube: 82–85%
• Facebook: 66–70%
• Instagram: 46–50%
• Pinterest: 32–36% (skews female)
• TikTok: 32–35% (skews younger, slight female tilt)
• Snapchat: 30–33% (very student-heavy)
• LinkedIn: 28–33% (lift from university and healthcare/professional sectors)
• X/Twitter: 20–23%
• Reddit: 20–23%
• WhatsApp: 20–22% (higher in immigrant and international student communities)

Age-group profile (where platforms over-index)

• 18–24 (overrepresented locally due to BU):
  • YouTube ~95%, Instagram ~80–85%, Snapchat ~75–80%, TikTok ~65–70%, Facebook ~30–40%
• 25–49:
  • YouTube ~90%, Facebook ~70%, Instagram ~55%, TikTok ~40%, Snapchat ~35%, LinkedIn ~35%
• 50+:
  • Facebook ~70%, YouTube ~75%, Pinterest ~30%, Instagram ~25–30%, TikTok ~15–20%

Gender tendencies by platform (directional)

• More women: Facebook (slight), Instagram (slight), Pinterest (strong), TikTok/Snapchat (slight)
• More men: YouTube (slight), Reddit (strong), X/Twitter (moderate), LinkedIn (slight)

Local behavioral trends

• Community and commerce:
  • Facebook is the hub for local news, school/road/weather updates, community groups (buy/sell, neighborhood watch), and Marketplace. Nextdoor is used in some suburbs but is secondary to Facebook groups.
• Student-driven habits:
  • Heavy Snapchat, Instagram Stories, and TikTok use for campus life, nightlife, and local food spots; late-night activity spikes during semesters.
• Video-first consumption:
  • Short-form (Reels/Shorts/TikTok) dominates discovery; YouTube for tutorials, sports highlights, and events (e.g., Rumble Ponies, local hockey, LUMA/Spiedie Fest content).
• Event and place discovery:
  • Facebook Events and Instagram explore/tags drive attendance for festivals, concerts, and small business promos; users expect vertical video, captions, and quick “what/where/when” info.
• Messaging as the default:
  • Facebook Messenger, Snapchat DMs, and Instagram DMs are primary contact channels for businesses and orgs; fast replies influence trust.
• Careers and recruiting:
  • LinkedIn is active for BU students, healthcare, engineering, and public sector roles; cross-posting to Indeed remains common.
• Trust and verification:
  • Residents often validate breaking info by cross-checking local outlets (TV/news Facebook pages) and community group posts.

Notes and method

• Estimates apply Pew 2024 U.S. adult platform usage to Broome’s age mix (ACS) with an upward adjustment for 18–24 due to Binghamton University. For precise local figures, field a short resident survey or analyze anonymized ad-platform reach (Facebook/Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok) by ZIP codes within the county.