Brown County

Here are recent, high-level demographics for Brown County, Ohio.

Population

• Total population: 43,676 (2020 Census)

Age (ACS 2019–2023, 5-year estimates)

• Median age: ~42 years
• Under 18: ~23%
• 18 to 64: ~59%
• 65 and over: ~18%

Gender (ACS 2019–2023)

• Male: ~50%
• Female: ~50%

Race and ethnicity (2020 Census; Hispanic can be of any race)

• White alone: ~95%
• 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): ~1–2%

Households (2020 Census / ACS 2019–2023)

• Total households: ~16,700
• Average household size: ~2.6
• Family households: ~70% of households
• Married-couple families: ~50% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~28%
• 1-person households: ~24%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census (DP1) and American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates. Figures rounded for clarity.

Brown County, OH snapshot (approx. 44,000 residents; rural density ~85–90 per sq. mile)

Estimated email users

• 30,000–35,000 residents use email regularly (derived from adult internet/email adoption in rural U.S. and ACS household access).

Age distribution (share using email)

• Teens 13–17: ~85–92% (school-issued accounts common)
• 18–34: ~97–99%
• 35–49: ~95–97%
• 50–64: ~90–94%
• 65+: ~80–85%

Gender split

• Near parity; women are a slight majority of residents, but email usage is essentially 50/50.

Digital access trends

• Home broadband subscription: ~78–82% of households; 12–15% have no home internet.
• Smartphone-only internet: ~12–18%, higher in lower-income and remote areas.
• Library and school Wi‑Fi are important access points (branches in Georgetown, Mt. Orab, Ripley).
• ACP wind-down (2024) may soften subscriptions among cost-sensitive households in 2025.

Local connectivity/density facts

• Better wired options (cable/fiber) cluster in towns and along SR‑32; outlying townships rely more on DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite.
• Many addresses still lack 100/20 Mbps; pockets with sub‑25/3 persist, and hilly terrain creates mobile dead zones.
• Ongoing fiber builds are improving coverage, but rural last‑mile distances keep competition and speeds uneven.

Figures are estimates based on Pew, FCC/NTIA maps, and recent ACS patterns for rural Ohio.

Below is a concise, planning-oriented snapshot of mobile phone usage in Brown County, Ohio, emphasizing how it differs from statewide patterns. Figures are best-available estimates based on recent federal/state datasets for rural Ohio (ACS Computer & Internet Use, FCC Broadband Map, NTIA Indicators of Broadband Need, Pew Research) and Brown County’s population profile. Use these as order-of-magnitude planning guides and verify locally where decisions require precision.

Overall user estimates

• Population and households: ~44,000 residents; ~17,000 households.
• Adult smartphone users: roughly 26,000–30,000 adults use smartphones (about 75–85% of adults). This is modestly below Ohio’s overall adult smartphone adoption (typically ~85–90%).
• Households with a smartphone: approximately 80–86% of households have at least one smartphone (a few points below Ohio statewide).
• Smartphone-only internet households (no fixed home broadband, rely on cellular): about 20–28% of households, likely higher than the Ohio average by several points. This has likely ticked up since 2024 with the sunset of the Affordable Connectivity Program.

Demographic patterns shaping usage

• Older age structure: Brown County skews older than Ohio overall. Smartphone adoption is near-universal among under-35, but drops more among 65+ than it does statewide. This increases the share of basic/legacy devices and voice/text-first usage in some segments.
• Income and education: Median income and 4-year degree attainment are lower than state averages. That correlates with:
  • A higher share of prepaid plans and MVNOs.
  • Greater likelihood of smartphone-only internet among low-income households and renters.
• Family/commuter dynamics: Western parts of the county with commuters toward Clermont/Hamilton counties show higher device turnover and data use; more remote townships see lower upgrade rates and more reliance on shared or older devices.

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• Terrain and settlement pattern: Rural spacing and rolling terrain create signal variability; coverage is strongest in/near towns and along major corridors (for example, the SR-32/Appalachian Highway and U.S. 68), with more gaps inside hollows and low-density roads.
• 4G LTE: Broad outdoor coverage from national carriers is typical, but indoor coverage can be inconsistent away from towns. Network congestion can appear around schools, fairgrounds, or peak commute windows.
• 5G availability: County-level 5G is present but more limited than urban Ohio. Mid-band 5G tends to cluster near higher-traffic corridors and population centers; wide-area low-band 5G fills in but behaves much like LTE for capacity.
• Backhaul and fiber: Long-haul/backhaul is strongest along regional corridors (e.g., SR-32). Outside those paths, limited middle-mile options constrain rural tower upgrades and small-cell economics.
• Alternatives: Fixed-wireless providers and a patchwork of cable/fiber incumbents/overbuilders create uneven fixed broadband. Where home broadband is weak or unaffordable, households lean on smartphone hotspots, amplifying cellular demand in evening hours.

How Brown County differs from Ohio overall

• Adoption is a bit lower:
  • Adult smartphone adoption and “households with a smartphone” trail Ohio by several points, largely due to age and income mix.
• Higher smartphone-only dependence:
  • Share of households relying on smartphones for home internet is meaningfully higher than the state rate. The ACP wind-down likely widened this gap in 2024–2025.
• Device mix and plan type:
  • Higher prevalence of prepaid/MVNO plans and older devices; slightly lower share of 5G-capable handsets than statewide, which dampens 5G utilization.
• Coverage quality and speeds:
  • Outdoor LTE is common, but indoor reliability and mid-band 5G capacity are less consistent than in metro Ohio. Evening slowdowns are more noticeable where fixed broadband alternatives are thin.
• Digital equity pressure:
  • Schools, libraries, and clinics report more hotspot lending and on-campus Wi‑Fi demand relative to population. This is stronger than in many Ohio suburbs.
• Upgrade cadence:
  • Fewer sites have been densified with mid-band 5G or additional sectors compared with Ohio’s metros, mainly due to backhaul cost and permitting ROI in low-density tracts.

Planning implications

• Targeted tower upgrades and backhaul on corridors beyond SR-32 could yield outsized benefits for both consumers and first responders.
• Programs that bundle affordable fixed broadband with device subsidies can reduce smartphone-only reliance, especially for seniors and low-income families.
• Indoor coverage solutions (signal boosters, small cells in public buildings) will improve service where construction or terrain weakens signal.
• Outreach via senior centers and adult education can raise smartphone literacy and adoption among 65+.

Data notes and how to validate locally

• Start with ACS table S2801 (Computer and Internet Use) for county vs. Ohio benchmarks on smartphone presence and cellular data plans; compare 5-year and latest 1-year where available.
• Cross-check coverage and technology with FCC Broadband Map and carrier availability layers; validate with drive tests or crowd-sourced apps if making siting decisions.
• Use NTIA Indicators of Broadband Need and Ohio Broadband Office maps to locate middle-mile constraints and un/underserved tracts.
• Revisit figures annually; rural counties can shift several points year-to-year with network upgrades or policy changes (e.g., ACP).

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot for Brown County, Ohio. County-level social data isn’t directly published; figures are modeled from U.S. Census/ACS population structure and Pew Research Center 2024 social media adoption (with rural adjustments).

At-a-glance (2025, estimates)

• Population ~44,000; adults 18+ ~34,000
• Social media users (age 13+): ~26,000–29,000
• Adult smartphone adoption: ~85–90%

Most-used platforms among adults (estimated share of adults who use each)

• YouTube: 80–85%
• Facebook: 65–72%
• Instagram: 38–45%
• TikTok: 25–33%
• Pinterest: 30–38% (skews female)
• Snapchat: 22–28% (heaviest 13–24)
• X (Twitter): 14–18% (skews male/news-focused)
• LinkedIn: 15–20% (lower in rural areas)
• WhatsApp: 15–20% (family/closed-group use)
• Reddit: 12–16%
• Nextdoor: 5–8%

Age-group usage (localized estimates aligned with rural U.S.)

• Teens 13–17: 90–95% use social; top picks: YouTube >95%, Snapchat 75–85%, TikTok 70–78%, Instagram 60–68%; limited Facebook.
• Ages 18–29: >95% use; YouTube >95%, Instagram 80–85%, TikTok 70–78%, Snapchat 65–72%, Facebook ~60–68%.
• Ages 30–49: 88–92%; Facebook 75–80%, YouTube 85–90%, Instagram 50–55%, Pinterest 40–45%, TikTok 35–45%.
• Ages 50–64: 75–82%; Facebook 70–75%, YouTube 75–80%, Instagram/Pinterest 30–35%.
• Ages 65+: 55–65%; Facebook 55–60%, YouTube 60–65% (news, how‑to).

Gender breakdown (users)

• Estimated user split: Women 52–55%, Men 45–48%.
• Platform skews: Pinterest and Facebook slightly female; Instagram slightly female; YouTube, Reddit, X slightly male; TikTok roughly balanced.

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural Ohio counties

• Community-first use: Facebook Groups for schools, youth sports, road closures, weather, safety, local government, churches, fairs/festivals.
• Marketplace culture: Heavy use of Facebook Marketplace and local buy/sell/trade groups.
• Video habits: Short vertical video (Reels/TikTok) for quick tips, events, local highlights; YouTube for DIY, equipment fixes, homesteading, and long-form local sports recaps.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is default; Snapchat among teens/young adults; WhatsApp for family circles.
• Trust and voice: Content from known local orgs, schools, and county agencies outperforms national pages; “faces and places” creative over stock imagery.
• Timing: Peak engagement weekday evenings (6–9 pm) and early mornings (6–8 am); Sunday late morning/early afternoon also strong.
• Ad implications: For broad reach use Facebook + YouTube; reach under-35 with TikTok/Snapchat/Instagram; use Pinterest for women 25–44; LinkedIn has limited ROI locally.

Notes: Treat percentages as directional for Brown County’s rural profile. For precise planning, validate with platform ad-reach tools (Facebook/Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube) filtered to Brown County ZIPs and the Cincinnati DMA.