Clark County Local Demographic Profile

Here are concise, current demographics for Clark County, Ohio.

Population

  • Total: 136,001 (2020 Census). Population has remained roughly ~136k in recent estimates.

Age

  • Under 18: ~22–23%
  • 65 and older: ~19%
  • Median age: ~41 years

Gender

  • Female: ~51%
  • Male: ~49%

Racial/ethnic composition (percent of total)

  • White, non-Hispanic: ~80%
  • Black or African American: ~11%
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~4–5%
  • Two or more races: ~3–4%
  • Asian: ~1%
  • Other (including American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander): <1%

Households and housing

  • Households: ~56,000
  • Average household size: ~2.4
  • Homeownership rate: ~64–66% (renters ~34–36%)
  • Household types: ~65% family households; ~30% one-person households

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

Email Usage in Clark County

Clark County, OH email usage snapshot

  • Population: ≈136,000.
  • Estimated email users: ~85,000–95,000 (≈65–70% of total residents). Basis: ~78% adults and 85–90% adult email adoption.
  • Age mix of email users (approx.): Teens 5–7%; 18–34: 28–30%; 35–54: 33–35%; 55–64: 14–16%; 65+: 16–18% (lower adoption at older ages keeps the user base slightly younger than the population).
  • Gender split among users: roughly mirrors the population (~51% female, 49% male).
  • Digital access trends: 82–85% of households have a broadband subscription; 10–15% are smartphone‑only for internet. Device access is high (smartphones in ~85–90% of adults); older and lower‑income households show lower fixed‑broadband take‑up. Public libraries/schools provide Wi‑Fi and computers; mobile LTE/5G coverage is strongest in and around Springfield and along major corridors, with weaker fixed options in some rural townships.
  • Local density/connectivity context: ≈340 people per sq. mile across ~400 sq. miles. Springfield’s urban core has multiple wired ISPs and higher speeds; less‑dense northern/eastern townships report more service gaps and slower plans.

Figures are estimates synthesized from Census/ACS patterns and national email adoption benchmarks.

Mobile Phone Usage in Clark County

Below is a pragmatic snapshot of mobile phone usage in Clark County, Ohio, with rough, defensible estimates and the key ways local patterns diverge from Ohio overall.

Headline user estimates (orders of magnitude, not exact counts)

  • Population baseline: ~136K residents; ~105–108K adults (18+); ~8–9K teens (13–17).
  • Smartphone users (13+): approximately 96K–101K.
    • Adults: ~89K–93K (assuming 84–87% adult ownership locally, a bit below Ohio’s ~88–90%).
    • Teens: ~7.5K–8.5K (high adoption among 13–17).
  • Basic/feature-phone users: still notable among seniors; on the order of 5–7K countywide.
  • Mobile-only households (smartphone as primary/only internet): likely 21–25% of ~54–57K households, or roughly 11–14K households—somewhat above Ohio’s average.

Demographic usage patterns

  • Age
    • 13–29: Near-universal smartphone adoption; heavy video/social and messaging app use. Local colleges and the Springfield urban core drive high mobile data demand.
    • 30–64: High ownership; mobile is integral for shift-based work, logistics, manufacturing, and healthcare. BYOD common.
    • 65+: Ownership lower than younger groups; more basic phones and shared family plans. Digital literacy and fixed-broadband gaps push some seniors to rely on cellular data.
  • Income
    • Lower median incomes than the state contribute to higher reliance on prepaid/MVNO plans, hotspotting, and “mobile-only” internet. The wind-down of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program in 2024 likely increased this reliance more here than in higher-income Ohio counties.
  • Race/ethnicity
    • In line with national patterns, Black and Hispanic residents are more likely to be smartphone-dependent for internet access than White residents. Clark County’s urban neighborhoods in Springfield show comparatively higher mobile-only use.
  • Urban vs rural
    • Springfield and the I-70/US‑68 corridors enjoy stronger 5G coverage and capacity; outlying townships see more LTE-only zones and occasional signal variability, reinforcing mobile-only use where fixed broadband is weak.

Digital infrastructure and service landscape

  • Cellular networks
    • All three national carriers have 5G in and around Springfield, with performance tapering in rural edges. Mid-band 5G is present in the core, with LTE fallback common in outlying areas.
    • Tower density follows transport corridors (I‑70, US‑68) and population centers; rural dead spots persist in pockets, especially away from major roads and outside Springfield.
  • Backhaul and capacity
    • Capacity is generally sufficient in town but more sensitive to congestion at events or during peak hours; rural sectors can be bandwidth-constrained.
  • Fixed broadband context (impacts mobile behavior)
    • Cable broadband is prevalent in Springfield; fiber is expanding but remains limited in much of the county. DSL/legacy copper persists in rural zones. Where fixed options are slow or costly, residents lean on phones and hotspots.
  • Public access and anchor institutions
    • Libraries, schools, and Wittenberg University offer Wi‑Fi that complements mobile service, especially for students and low-income users.
  • Public safety
    • FirstNet (AT&T) presence supports emergency communications; coverage priorities broadly overlap with commercial footprints.

How Clark County differs from Ohio overall

  • Slightly lower smartphone ownership rate overall due to an older age profile and lower median incomes.
  • Higher share of prepaid/MVNO users and slower device replacement cycles; 5G device penetration likely lags the state average by a few points.
  • Higher proportion of mobile-only households, driven by fixed-broadband gaps outside Springfield and budget constraints.
  • More pronounced urban–rural performance gap, with Springfield competitive on 5G speeds but outer townships more variable.
  • Digital equity pressure is greater: with ACP support reduced, substitution of mobile data for home internet is more visible than in higher-income Ohio counties.

Notes on methodology and uncertainty

  • Estimates are derived by applying recent U.S./Ohio smartphone adoption rates to local population and adjusting for Clark County’s older age structure, income profile, and rural mix. They are intended for planning, not for compliance reporting. For precision, validate with the latest ACS microdata, FCC mobile coverage maps, carrier-reported 5G footprints, and local school/library usage statistics.

Social Media Trends in Clark County

Clark County, OH social media snapshot (estimates for 2025)

How this was built: County population from recent ACS estimates combined with Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform-usage rates. Where county-specific data aren’t published, figures are scaled from national benchmarks and should be treated as directional.

At-a-glance user stats

  • Population: ~136,000. Adults (18+): ~107,000. Teens (13–17): ~8–9,000.
  • Overall reach: ~80–85% of adults use at least one major social platform (≈85,000–91,000 adults). Among teens, ~95% use at least one platform (≈8,000–8,500).
  • Total residents 13+ on social: roughly 93,000–99,000.

Most-used platforms (adults) Modeled share of Clark County adults who use each platform (Pew 2024 national rates applied to ~107k adults):

  • YouTube: 83% (89k adults)
  • Facebook: 68% (73k)
  • Instagram: 47% (50k)
  • Pinterest: 35% (38k)
  • TikTok: 33% (35k)
  • LinkedIn: 30% (32k)
  • Snapchat: 27% (29k)
  • WhatsApp: 29% (31k)
  • Reddit: 23% (25k)
  • X/Twitter: 22% (24k)

Age patterns (what people use most)

  • Teens 13–17: YouTube (very high), Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram; light on Facebook. Heavy daily use; creation and messaging-centric.
  • 18–29: YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok; Facebook is secondary. Short‑form video, Stories/DMs, music and creator content drive time.
  • 30–49: YouTube and Facebook are dominant; Instagram strong; TikTok rising; LinkedIn relevant for careers. Uses Marketplace, local groups, how‑to/video learning.
  • 50–64: Facebook and YouTube lead; Pinterest useful for projects; Instagram moderate; TikTok growing but lower than younger cohorts.
  • 65+: Facebook first, YouTube second; lighter on other platforms; prefers local news, church/community updates, family content.

Gender breakdown (tendencies)

  • Overall social audience skews slightly female, reflecting county sex mix and platform use; expect roughly ~52% women / ~48% men among active users.
  • Platforms:
    • More women: Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest (Pinterest especially female-skewed).
    • More men: Reddit, X/Twitter; YouTube near-even; LinkedIn near-even to slight male tilt.
    • TikTok: relatively balanced, often modest female tilt.

Behavioral trends to know

  • Facebook remains the community hub: local groups, schools/youth sports, events, church/volunteer orgs, and Marketplace activity are high.
  • Video is the default: YouTube for education/how‑to and product research; Reels/TikTok for discovery of local dining, shops, and events.
  • Messaging over feeds: Instagram DMs, Snapchat, and Messenger drive private sharing and quick coordination.
  • “Local first” content wins: timely weather, road closures, school updates, local sports, festivals, and small-business promos earn outsized engagement.
  • Shopping and recommendations: Marketplace and local buy/sell/trade groups are heavily used; short-form reviews and “things to do this weekend” content convert.
  • Posting/scrolling cadence: spikes mornings (commute/school drop-off), lunch, and evenings; weekends see higher local event engagement.

Sources

  • Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024 (U.S. adult platform penetration and age splits); Pew Research Center, Teens, Social Media and Technology (2023).
  • U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 2023, Clark County, OH population/age/sex.