Paulding County

Paulding County, Ohio — key demographics

Population size

• 18,626 (2023 population estimate)
• 18,806 (2020 Census)
• Net change since 2020: −1.0%

Age

• Under 5: 5–6%
• Under 18: ~24–25%
• 65 and over: ~19–20%
• Median age: ~40–41 years (Estimates from ACS 5-year; age shares rounded)

Gender

• Female: ~49.5%
• Male: ~50.5%

Racial/ethnic composition

• White alone: ~93–94%
• Black or African American alone: ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~0.3–0.4%
• Asian alone: ~0.3–0.4%
• Two or more races: ~3–4%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~6–7%
• White alone, not Hispanic: ~88%

Households and housing

• Households: ~7,400 (ACS 5-year)
• Persons per household: ~2.58–2.60
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate: ~79–80%
• Housing units: ~8,450 (2023)

Insights

• Small, slowly declining population since 2020
• Older-than-national age structure with roughly one in five residents 65+
• Predominantly White, with a small but notable Hispanic community
• High owner-occupancy and modest household size consistent with rural counties

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Census; 2023 Population Estimates; American Community Survey 5-year). Figures rounded for clarity.

Paulding County, OH email snapshot

• Population and density: 18,600 residents across ~416 sq mi (45 people/sq mi); ~7,700 households.
• Estimated email users (adults 18+): ≈12,700 (about 90% of ~14,100 adults), reflecting near-universal email use among internet-connected adults.
• Age distribution of email adoption (share of adults in each group using email): 18–29 ≈95%; 30–49 ≈96%; 50–64 ≈90%; 65+ ≈78%. This skews total email use toward working-age adults.
• Gender split among email users: effectively even (≈50% female, ≈50% male), mirroring the county’s overall sex distribution.
• Digital access trends: About 80–85% of households subscribe to home broadband; ~90%+ have a computer or smartphone at home; ~12–18% are smartphone‑only for internet. Adoption and speeds have risen steadily since 2021 with state and federal rural-broadband investments.
• Local connectivity facts: Most addresses in and around Paulding, Antwerp, and Oakwood have cable or fiber with 100/20 Mbps+ service; lower-density townships rely more on DSL/fixed wireless, creating uneven performance. 5G coverage is present along main corridors and town centers, improving mobile email reliability.

Bottom line: Email usage is pervasive countywide, with strongest adoption among ages 18–64, parity by gender, and improving—yet still uneven—fixed broadband in rural stretches.

Mobile phone usage in Paulding County, Ohio — 2025 snapshot

Population baseline

• Total population: ~18,800 (2020 Census); ~7,400 households; land area ~416 sq mi (low-density, rural)
• Adults (18+): ~14,500
• Age mix: ~24% under 18, ~19–20% 65+
• Median household income: low-60s (thousand USD), below Ohio’s mid-60s
• Education: bachelor’s+ roughly mid-teens percent, below Ohio average These structural factors (older, more rural, lower income/educational attainment) shape mobile adoption and usage differently than statewide norms.

User estimates (adults)

• Smartphone users: 12,000–12,400 (roughly 83–86% of adults). Below Ohio’s major-metro averages, but close to national rural benchmarks.
• Basic/feature-phone users: 1,100–1,400 (around 8–10%).
• No personal mobile phone: 900–1,100 (about 6–8%).
• Wireless-only households (no landline): 4,400–4,800 households (about 60–65% of households), several points below Ohio’s statewide share due to the county’s older age profile.
• Households relying on a smartphone as their primary home internet: ~1,200–1,500 (around 16–20%), higher than Ohio overall, reflecting patchier fixed-broadband options.

Demographic patterns behind the estimates

• Age: Near-universal smartphone adoption among 18–34; high among 35–64; materially lower among 65+ (roughly two-thirds to three-quarters), pulling the county average down relative to Ohio’s.
• Income: Sub-$35k households show reduced smartphone and unlimited-plan uptake and greater prepaid usage; >$75k households near state averages.
• Platform/plan mix: Slightly higher Android and prepaid shares than Ohio’s metro-heavy mix; more line-by-line month-to-month plans, driven by cost sensitivity and retail availability.
• Work and agriculture: Heavier use of voice/SMS, push-to-talk/work apps, and mobile hotspots for field connectivity compared with state averages.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Networks present: AT&T (including FirstNet for public safety), Verizon, T-Mobile. 4G LTE is effectively countywide along primary roads and in towns; 5G is present but discontinuous outside population centers and highways.
• 5G profile: Predominantly low-band (wide-area) with spot mid-band along key corridors and in towns; population coverage meaningfully lower than Ohio’s statewide average, especially versus metro counties with dense C-band deployments.
• Performance: Median speeds trail Ohio’s metro counties. LTE works reliably for web, messaging, and basic video; 5G boosts capacity where available but remains inconsistent in sparsely populated tracts and indoors in some farmsteads.
• Tower grid: Rural macro sites spaced widely, yielding car-corridor coverage that can soften in-between towns; residents and farms more likely to rely on in-home signal boosters for indoor service than the state average.
• Backhaul and cross-coverage: Mix of fiber and microwave backhaul typical of rural NW Ohio; seamless roaming toward Indiana corridors; FirstNet coverage prioritizes major routes and township hubs.
• Fixed-broadband interplay: Cable/fiber concentrated in towns; DSL and wireless ISPs common in outlying areas. Where fixed options are slow or unavailable, households lean on mobile hotspots and higher-cap data plans more than Ohio’s average.
• Affordability shift: The sunset of the federal ACP subsidy in 2024 increased sensitivity to plan pricing; prepaid and Lifeline participation play a larger role locally than in urban Ohio.

How Paulding County differs from Ohio overall

• Slightly lower adult smartphone penetration, driven by an older age mix and rural infrastructure constraints.
• Higher reliance on mobile data as a substitute for home broadband in areas with limited wired service.
• More prepaid and budget-plan usage; Android share likely higher than in Ohio’s metro centers.
• Slower and patchier 5G rollout than the state average; LTE remains the workhorse.
• Greater use of voice/SMS and hotspotting for work and school tasks versus app-centric, 5G-first behaviors common in cities.

Method note

• Figures combine hard local demographics (Census/ACS) with recent U.S./rural adoption rates (e.g., Pew, CDC NHIS) adjusted to county age/income/rurality. Estimates are stated as ranges to reflect uncertainty while remaining decision-useful.

Paulding County, OH social media snapshot (2025)

Scope note: County-level platform shares aren’t directly published by official sources. Figures below are localized estimates for Paulding County derived from 2024 Pew Research usage benchmarks and rural Ohio demographic patterns; treat them as directional but decision-ready.

Overall usage

• Adults using at least one social platform weekly: 82–85% of adults
• Primary device: mobile; video and stories/reels drive the highest organic reach

Most-used platforms (share of adults using at least monthly)

• YouTube: 80–85%
• Facebook: 70–75%
• Instagram: 40–45%
• TikTok: 30–35%
• Pinterest: 28–33%
• Snapchat: 25–30%
• LinkedIn: 15–20%
• X (Twitter): 12–15%
• Nextdoor: 5–8%

Age-group usage (share active on any platform; top platforms and typical penetration)

• Teens (13–17): 95%+ active; Snapchat 70–80%, TikTok 65–75%, YouTube 95%+, Instagram 60–70%
• 18–29: ~95% active; YouTube 90%+, Instagram 70–75%, Snapchat 60–65%, TikTok 55–60%, Facebook 55–60%
• 30–49: 85–90% active; Facebook 75–80%, YouTube 85–90%, Instagram 45–50%, TikTok 35–40%, Snapchat 25–30%, Pinterest 35–40%
• 50–64: 75–80% active; Facebook 70–75%, YouTube 70–75%, Pinterest 30–35%, Instagram 25–30%, TikTok 20–25%
• 65+: 55–60% active; Facebook 60–65%, YouTube 55–60%, Instagram 15–20%

Gender breakdown (share of each platform’s local user base)

• Facebook: ~55–60% female, 40–45% male
• Instagram: ~55–60% female, 40–45% male
• TikTok: ~60–65% female, 35–40% male
• Pinterest: ~70–75% female, 25–30% male
• Snapchat: ~55–60% female, 40–45% male
• YouTube: ~45–50% female, 50–55% male
• LinkedIn: ~48–52% female, 48–52% male
• X (Twitter): ~40–45% female, 55–60% male

Behavioral trends and engagement patterns

• Facebook dominates community life: school alerts, church and civic groups, youth sports, local news, Marketplace, and event promotions
• Short-form video (Reels/TikTok/Shorts) outperforms static posts; clips of local events, sports highlights, county fair/4‑H/FFA, farm and outdoors content get the highest shares
• Trust is local: posts with recognizable people, venues, or organizations consistently outperform brand‑only creative
• Peak engagement windows: 6:30–8:30 a.m., 12–1 p.m., and 7–10 p.m.; weekend mornings (Sat) are strong for sales/garage and event posts
• Messaging is a conversion path: Facebook Messenger is widely used for inquiries and scheduling; WhatsApp is niche; group text remains common for teams/clubs
• Discovery skews visual: Instagram for showcasing products, local eateries, and youth activities; Pinterest for recipes, crafts, home/farm projects; YouTube for how‑to and equipment reviews
• Platform roles: Facebook Groups replace Nextdoor for neighborhood/community chatter; LinkedIn usage concentrates in education, healthcare, public sector, and manufacturing management; X is niche for sports/news followers

Key takeaways

• Plan around Facebook + YouTube as reach foundations, with Instagram and TikTok to capture under‑40 attention
• Lead with people-centric, place‑specific video; cross-post between Facebook and Instagram; use Groups and Events for distribution
• Time posts to mornings, lunch, and evenings; use Messenger for call‑to‑action and customer service