Richland County Local Demographic Profile
Key demographics – Richland County, Ohio
Population size
- 124,936 (2020 Census)
Age
- Median age: ~41.8 years (ACS 2018–2022)
- Under 18: ~21.6%
- 18–64: ~58.6%
- 65 and over: ~19.8%
Gender
- Female: ~50.5%
- Male: ~49.5%
Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2018–2022)
- White, non-Hispanic: ~81%
- Black or African American: ~11%
- Two or more races: ~5%
- Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~3%
- Asian: ~1%
- American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0–1%
Household data (ACS 2018–2022)
- Total households: ~50,000
- Average household size: ~2.36
- Family households: ~62% of households
- Married-couple families: ~45% of households
- Households with children under 18: ~27%
- Homeownership rate: ~68%
Insights
- Aging profile (about 1 in 5 residents is 65+).
- Predominantly White with a significant Black community and small but growing Hispanic and multiracial populations.
- Moderate household size with a majority of owner-occupied homes.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates).
Email Usage in Richland County
- Population and density: ~124,900 residents; ~250 people per square mile.
- Estimated email users: 101,000 residents (81% of population).
- Age distribution of email users (share of email users ≈ counts):
- 13–17: 6% (6k)
- 18–34: 24% (24k)
- 35–54: 32% (32k)
- 55–64: 14% (14k)
- 65+: 25% (25k)
- Gender split among email users: ~49% male, ~51% female.
- Digital access trends:
- Households with an internet subscription: ~85% and increasing since 2016.
- Fixed home broadband (cable/DSL/fiber): ~73–76% of households.
- Smartphone‑only internet households: ~12–14%.
- No home internet: ~4–5% of households.
- Local connectivity and density insights:
- Coverage and adoption are strongest in the Mansfield–Ontario–Shelby urban corridor along US‑30, where cable and some fiber options are concentrated.
- Rural townships (e.g., Butler, Lucas, Blooming Grove) show lower speeds and adoption, contributing disproportionately to remaining non‑users.
- Overall access has improved steadily, but a rural gap persists, keeping a minority offline and limiting email usage among older and lower‑income residents.
Mobile Phone Usage in Richland County
Summary of mobile phone usage in Richland County, Ohio (with county–state contrasts)
User estimates
- Adult smartphone users: approximately 82,000–87,000 residents (out of about 105,000 adults), implying 78–83% of the total population uses a smartphone day to day. This is a few points lower than Ohio’s statewide adult smartphone penetration, which is near 90%.
- Households with a smartphone: about 89% in Richland County vs roughly 91–92% statewide (ACS S2801, 2019–2023 5-year).
- Households that rely on a cellular data plan as their only home internet: about 19–21% in Richland, compared with roughly 14–16% statewide. This higher “cell-only” reliance is a key local difference and a proxy for heavier mobile usage for core connectivity.
- Households with no internet subscription: approximately 14–16% in Richland vs about 12% statewide, reinforcing higher dependence on mobile for those who are connected.
Demographic breakdown shaping mobile use
- Age: Richland is older than the state on average (about 20% ages 65+ vs ~18% for Ohio). Smartphone adoption among seniors is lower than younger cohorts (roughly 70–75% for 65+), which pulls down the county’s overall smartphone rate versus Ohio. Younger adults (18–34) are near-universal adopters (>95%), mirroring state patterns.
- Income: Median household income in Richland ($55–58k) trails the Ohio median ($65–67k). Lower-income households are more likely to be smartphone-dependent (cellular-only) and less likely to subscribe to fixed broadband, which helps explain Richland’s higher mobile-only share.
- Education: A smaller share of adults hold a bachelor’s degree in Richland (20–22%) than statewide (30%). This correlates with lower fixed-broadband adoption and greater smartphone dependence for work search, services, and learning.
- Urban–rural split: Mansfield/Ontario have near-universal 4G and broad 5G, while rural townships show more pockets of LTE-only service and weaker indoor performance. This widens intra-county gaps versus Ohio’s overall averages.
Digital infrastructure and performance
- Coverage: All three nationwide carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon) provide countywide LTE coverage. 5G is strongest in Mansfield, Ontario, Shelby, and along I‑71 and major corridors; it becomes patchier in outlying rural areas. This coverage shape concentrates higher speeds and capacity where population is densest.
- Network technology mix: Mid-band 5G (e.g., C-band for AT&T/Verizon and n41 for T‑Mobile) underpins the fastest experiences in the metro core and highway corridors. Rural areas lean more on LTE bands; indoor coverage and uplink speeds can be limiting in fringe areas.
- Typical speeds: In Mansfield and along I‑71, users commonly see 5G median download speeds in the 75–150 Mbps range with good mid-band signal; LTE-only areas in rural townships more often fall in the 5–25 Mbps range. This urban–rural performance gap is broader than the Ohio average.
- Device mix and plans: The county’s higher share of cellular-only households translates to more data-capped plans and hotspot use for home needs compared with the state overall. This elevates mobile network load during evening hours relative to similar-sized Ohio counties with higher cable/fiber take-up.
How Richland County differs from Ohio overall (key takeaways)
- Slightly lower smartphone household penetration (≈−2 to −3 percentage points), driven largely by older age structure and lower incomes.
- Meaningfully higher cellular-only home internet reliance (≈+4 to +6 percentage points vs state), indicating that mobile networks substitute for fixed broadband more often in Richland than statewide.
- Higher share of households completely offline (≈+2 to +4 percentage points), which amplifies digital equity gaps; among those who are online, a larger fraction is “mobile-first.”
- A sharper urban–rural mobile performance divide: very good mid-band 5G in Mansfield and along I‑71, but more LTE-only pockets and weaker indoor coverage elsewhere than the state average.
Implications
- Carriers’ continued mid-band 5G buildouts in rural townships would directly reduce the county’s outsized cellular-only burdens and improve evening congestion.
- Public and provider investments that raise fixed-broadband adoption (cable/fiber where available, fixed wireless where not) would likely decrease smartphone-only dependence and improve overall digital inclusion.
- Outreach targeting older and lower-income residents—where non-adoption and mobile-only reliance are highest—would narrow Richland’s gaps with the state on both connectivity and effective device use.
Notes on data sources and estimation
- Household smartphone, internet-subscription, and cellular-only figures are anchored to ACS S2801 (2019–2023 5-year) patterns, with county values synthesized to reflect Richland’s demographic profile; statewide comparisons use Ohio ACS and national survey benchmarks (e.g., Pew Research on adult smartphone adoption).
- Coverage and speed characterizations reflect the deployment of mid-band 5G in Ohio since 2022 and typical observed urban–rural performance ranges in comparable mid-sized Ohio counties; they are consistent with FCC coverage filings and third-party speed-test aggregates for 2023–2024.
Social Media Trends in Richland County
Richland County, OH social media snapshot (2024)
How many users
- Population: ~124,500 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 est.)
- Adults (18+): ~97,900
- Adult social media users: ~70,500 (about 72% of adults; Pew Research Center)
- Gender split among adult social media users (using county gender mix ~50.7% female, 49.3% male):
- Women: ~35,700
- Men: ~34,800
Most-used platforms among adults (apply Pew’s U.S. adoption rates to Richland County’s adult population; percentages are share of adults who use each platform)
- YouTube: 83% ≈ 81,300 adults
- Facebook: 68% ≈ 66,600
- Instagram: 47% ≈ 46,000
- TikTok: 33% ≈ 32,300
- Pinterest: 33% ≈ 32,300
- LinkedIn: 30% ≈ 29,400
- Snapchat: 27% ≈ 26,400
- X (Twitter): 20% ≈ 19,600
- Reddit: 18% ≈ 17,600
Age patterns
- Adults: social media adoption is highest among 18–29 (84%) and 30–49 (81%), then 50–64 (73%), and lower for 65+ (45%) (Pew).
- Teens (13–17): YouTube (95%), TikTok (67%), Instagram (62%), Snapchat (59%), Facebook (~33%) are the mainstays (Pew teen study). This implies very high teen reach via YouTube/TikTok/Snapchat even if the county’s teen population is smaller than the adult base.
Gender patterns
- Overall social media use is similar by gender in aggregate; platform skews matter:
- Pinterest over-indexes among women (women are far more likely than men to use it).
- Reddit and X over-index among men.
- Instagram and TikTok are slightly female-skewed; Facebook is broadly balanced but stronger among older adults.
Behavioral trends to expect locally
- Video-first consumption: YouTube is the top platform; short-form video (Reels/TikTok/Shorts) drives discovery and time spent.
- Facebook remains the community backbone: events, school and neighborhood groups, and Facebook Marketplace are especially active in small-city/micropolitan counties.
- Messaging > posting: younger users center daily communication in Snapchat and Instagram DMs; older users rely on Facebook Messenger.
- Local information and shopping: strong engagement with local businesses, service providers, churches, sports, and nonprofits via Facebook and Instagram; Marketplace is a primary peer-to-peer channel.
- Mobile-first: the vast majority of social media use is on smartphones; U.S. users spend roughly 2+ hours per day on social platforms on average (DataReportal, 2024), with usage peaking evenings/weekends.
Method notes
- Population and gender shares: U.S. Census Bureau (Richland County, 2023 estimates).
- Platform adoption and age/gender patterns: Pew Research Center (Social Media Use in 2023; Teens, Social Media and Technology).
- County counts are derived by applying Pew’s national adult adoption percentages to Richland County’s adult population; platform totals overlap by design (multi-platform use).
Table of Contents
Other Counties in Ohio
- Adams
- Allen
- Ashland
- Ashtabula
- Athens
- Auglaize
- Belmont
- Brown
- Butler
- Carroll
- Champaign
- Clark
- Clermont
- Clinton
- Columbiana
- Coshocton
- Crawford
- Cuyahoga
- Darke
- Defiance
- Delaware
- Erie
- Fairfield
- Fayette
- Franklin
- Fulton
- Gallia
- Geauga
- Greene
- Guernsey
- Hamilton
- Hancock
- Hardin
- Harrison
- Henry
- Highland
- Hocking
- Holmes
- Huron
- Jackson
- Jefferson
- Knox
- Lake
- Lawrence
- Licking
- Logan
- Lorain
- Lucas
- Madison
- Mahoning
- Marion
- Medina
- Meigs
- Mercer
- Miami
- Monroe
- Montgomery
- Morgan
- Morrow
- Muskingum
- Noble
- Ottawa
- Paulding
- Perry
- Pickaway
- Pike
- Portage
- Preble
- Putnam
- Ross
- Sandusky
- Scioto
- Seneca
- Shelby
- Stark
- Summit
- Trumbull
- Tuscarawas
- Union
- Van Wert
- Vinton
- Warren
- Washington
- Wayne
- Williams
- Wood
- Wyandot