Hocking County

Hocking County, Ohio — key demographics (U.S. Census Bureau: 2020 Census; 2018–2022 ACS 5-year estimates)

Population size

• Total population: 28,050 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~44 years
• Under 18: ~21%
• 18–64: ~58%
• 65 and over: ~21%

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS; Hispanic is an ethnicity, any race)

• White: ~95%
• Black or African American: ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.3%
• Asian: ~0.3%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~1–2%

Household data (ACS)

• Households: ~11.4k
• Average household size: ~2.4 persons
• Family households: ~64%
• Married-couple households: ~48–50% of all households
• Households with children under 18: ~25–30%
• One-person households: ~27–30%
• Homeownership rate: ~75–78%

Insights

• Small, largely rural county with a predominantly White, non-Hispanic population.
• Older age profile (median age ~44; roughly one in five residents 65+).
• Household structure is family-oriented with high homeownership and modest household sizes.

• Scope: Hocking County, OH (population ≈28,300; adults ≈22,000; area ≈423 sq mi; density ≈67 people/sq mi).
• Estimated email users: ≈20,000 adults (about 90% of 18+), aligning with rural U.S. email adoption among internet users.
• Age pattern of email use (share of adults in each group using email): 18–29 ≈98%; 30–49 ≈96%; 50–64 ≈90%; 65+ ≈75–80% (older adoption improving yearly).
• Gender split: Email usage is essentially even (male ≈90%, female ≈91%); overall users ≈50/50 reflecting the county’s near‑even sex ratio.
• Digital access and devices (ACS-style county benchmarks, 2022–2023):
  • Households with a broadband subscription (any type): ≈80–83%.
  • Households with no home internet: ≈14–17%.
  • Smartphone‑only internet households: ≈17–20% (increasing), indicating reliance on mobile for email.
  • Computer availability in households: ≈85–90%.
• Trends and local connectivity facts:
  • Broadband and fiber coverage are strongest around Logan and the US‑33 corridor; service gaps persist in wooded, hilly areas of Hocking Hills.
  • Public libraries, schools, and other anchors provide critical Wi‑Fi access and help narrow the digital divide.
  • Overall email reach is high and growing, driven by smartphone adoption even where fixed broadband is limited.

Mobile phone usage in Hocking County, Ohio — summary and how it differs from statewide patterns

Headline size and usage

• Population and households: About 28,000 residents and roughly 11,000–11,500 households.
• Smartphone households: Approximately 86% of households have a smartphone (Ohio ≈ 90%). That equates to about 9,500–10,000 Hocking County households with smartphones.
• Individual users: An estimated 21,000 residents use a mobile phone/smartphone regularly (about 75% of the total population), reflecting slightly lower adoption than Ohio’s metro-driven average.

Demographic factors shaping usage (vs Ohio)

• Age: Hocking County skews older (≈21% age 65+ vs ≈18% statewide). Among seniors, smartphone adoption is lower, which pulls down overall use and app engagement relative to Ohio’s urban counties.
• Income and education: Median household income is several thousand dollars below the Ohio median, and bachelor’s attainment is notably lower. This correlates with:
  • Higher reliance on lower-cost plans and MVNOs.
  • More “cellular-only” home internet reliance where cable/fiber is unavailable or unaffordable.
• Rurality: Outside of Logan, settlement is dispersed and terrain is hilly/forested. This leads to coverage gaps and slower speeds away from highways—patterns that are atypical for Ohio’s metros but common in Appalachian counties.

Device ownership and connectivity estimates (ACS-style household measures)

• Smartphone in household: ~86% in Hocking vs ~90% Ohio.
• Any broadband subscription: Roughly high-70s percent in Hocking vs mid-80s percent Ohio, reflecting a gap aligned with rural availability and affordability.
• Cellular data plans at home: Mid-60s percent of households in Hocking report a cellular data plan, a few points below Ohio’s figure but with a higher share using cellular as their primary connection due to limited wired options.
• Cellular-only home internet: About 12% of Hocking households rely primarily on cellular data (vs ≈8% statewide), indicating heavier mobile dependence for everyday connectivity than in Ohio overall.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carriers present: AT&T (including FirstNet), Verizon, and T-Mobile all operate in the county.
• 5G footprint:
  • 5G is present in and around Logan and along the US‑33 corridor; outside these corridors, service often falls back to LTE.
  • C‑band (3.7 GHz) from Verizon/AT&T and 2.5 GHz mid‑band from T‑Mobile are the primary 5G performance layers; mmWave is effectively absent outside small pockets, unlike in larger Ohio metros.
• Terrain impacts: The Hocking Hills’ hollows and tree cover create dead zones and sharp signal attenuation, especially in park and backroad areas. This results in more call drops and data slowdowns than typical in flatter regions of the state.
• Backhaul and density:
  • “Dozens” of registered towers serve the county, with sites concentrated near Logan and along major routes (US‑33, OH‑664, OH‑93). Rural spacing is wider than in metro Ohio, limiting capacity and indoor coverage.
  • Fiber backhaul is strongest along US‑33; off‑corridor sites are more constrained, which limits 5G mid‑band reach and throughput.
• Public safety: FirstNet Band‑14 coverage is established on main corridors and in population centers, improving reliability for emergency services compared with legacy coverage but not fully erasing rural dead zones.

Usage behaviors and market patterns that differ from Ohio overall

• Higher dependence on mobile for home access: A larger slice of households use cellular data as their primary or backup internet, driven by patchy cable/fiber footprints. This is less common in Ohio’s metro counties.
• Lower senior adoption and app intensity: The older population mix leads to lower smartphone penetration among 65+, lower mobile banking/telehealth uptake, and more voice/SMS‑centric use compared to statewide urban areas.
• Seasonal congestion: Tourism to Hocking Hills drives weekend/holiday spikes in traffic and localized slowdowns that are atypical in most Ohio counties, with hotspots around trailheads, lodgings, and SR‑664.
• Coverage variability: Strong signal and 5G along US‑33 contrasts with fringe LTE or no‑service pockets in wooded valleys—variation that is greater than in most Ohio counties.

Key takeaways

• Hocking County’s mobile adoption is high but trails Ohio’s urbanized average by several points due to age, income, and infrastructure gaps.
• A meaningful minority of households rely primarily on cellular data at home, a rural Appalachian pattern not seen at the same rate in Ohio’s cities and suburbs.
• 5G is present but corridor‑centric; terrain and tower spacing create more dead zones and variability than typical statewide, and seasonal tourism amplifies congestion pressures.

Hocking County, OH — Social Media Snapshot (2024, modeled estimates)

Baseline and overall use

• Population baseline: ~28K residents; ~22K adults (18+)
• Adults using at least one social platform: 80% (17.6K adults)

Most‑used platforms among adults (18+)

• YouTube: 78% (~17.2K)
• Facebook: 64% (~14.1K)
• Instagram: 34% (~7.5K)
• Pinterest: 28% (~6.2K)
• TikTok: 28% (~6.2K)
• Snapchat: 22% (~4.8K)
• Reddit: 14% (~3.1K)
• LinkedIn: 13% (~2.9K)
• X (Twitter): 12% (~2.6K)
• WhatsApp: 12% (~2.6K)
• Nextdoor: 5% (~1.1K)

Age‑group adoption (share of each cohort using the platform)

• Teens 13–17: YouTube ~93%; Instagram ~62%; TikTok ~63%; Snapchat ~60%; Facebook ~19%
• Adults 18–29: YouTube ~93%; Instagram ~76%; Snapchat ~68%; TikTok ~64%; Facebook ~70%
• Adults 30–49: YouTube ~90%; Facebook ~80%; Instagram ~50%; TikTok ~36%; Snapchat ~30%; Pinterest ~40%
• Adults 50–64: YouTube ~80%; Facebook ~74%; Instagram ~30%; TikTok ~19%; Pinterest ~35%
• Adults 65+: YouTube ~55%; Facebook ~62%; Instagram ~17%; TikTok ~9%; Pinterest ~28%

Gender breakdown (share of user base by platform; county is ~51% women / 49% men overall)

• Facebook ~56% women / 44% men
• Instagram ~55% women / 45% men
• TikTok ~58% women / 42% men
• Snapchat ~54% women / 46% men
• Pinterest ~77% women / 23% men
• YouTube ~48% women / 52% men
• Reddit ~32% women / 68% men
• X (Twitter) ~40% women / 60% men
• LinkedIn ~46% women / 54% men

Behavioral trends observed locally

• Facebook is the civic backbone: heavy use of local groups for road closures, school updates, community alerts, church and youth sports; Marketplace is a primary buy/sell channel
• Video is dominant for both consumption and discovery: YouTube for how‑to/DIY, hunting/fishing, automotive repair, home projects; TikTok and Instagram Reels for short local highlights and tourism content tied to Hocking Hills
• Younger residents favor ephemeral and short‑form: 13–29 lean on Snapchat for daily messaging and TikTok for entertainment; Instagram is the main “profile” hub for under‑35
• Cross‑posting is common: TikTok videos repurposed to Instagram Reels and Facebook; local businesses post first on Facebook, then mirror to Instagram
• Messaging ecosystems: Facebook Messenger is near‑universal among Facebook users; Snapchat dominates teen/young‑adult messaging; WhatsApp remains niche
• Peak activity times: evenings (roughly 7–10 pm) and weekends, aligning with shift and service‑sector schedules; weekday lunch hours see a smaller secondary spike
• Commerce and tourism pull: local retailers, outfitters, and short‑term rentals rely on Facebook/Instagram for promotions, events, and seasonal hiring; review sharing and UGC around Hocking Hills drives visitation decisions
• Rural bandwidth realities shape behavior: video viewing outweighs uploading among 35+, with more sharing/reposting than original creation; younger users are more likely to create and post short videos

Method note

• Figures are 2024 modeled estimates for Hocking County derived from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption rates adjusted for the county’s older/rural demographic profile and ACS population structure. Counts rounded to the nearest hundred; practical uncertainty ±3–5 percentage points by platform.