Ottawa County

Ottawa County, Oklahoma — key demographics

Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5‑year estimates)

Population

• Total population: 30,285 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: 38.9 years
• Under 18: 24%
• 18 to 64: 58%
• 65 and over: 18%

Sex

• Female: 51%
• Male: 49%

Race and ethnicity (mutually exclusive; sums to 100%)

• White, non-Hispanic: 66.9%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: 1.2%
• American Indian and Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: 16.0%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: 0.6%
• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic: 0.1%
• Some other race, non-Hispanic: 0.2%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: 7.6%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): 7.4%

Households and housing

• Households: ~12,100
• Average household size: 2.45
• Family households: ~64% of households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~69%
• Housing units: ~13,700

Insights

• Population is stable to slightly declining since 2010.
• The county has a notably higher American Indian/Alaska Native share than the Oklahoma average.
• Age structure skews slightly older, with nearly one in five residents age 65+.

Ottawa County, OK snapshot (2020 Census): population 30,285 across 484 sq mi (63 people/sq mi). County seat: Miami (~13k), concentrating most connectivity.

Estimated email users: 19,000–22,000 residents actively use email. Method: apply typical adult internet/email adoption in similar rural counties to local population.

Age distribution of email users (estimated):

• 18–34: ~25%
• 35–64: ~55%
• 65+: ~20% Use intensity is highest among 18–64; seniors participate but at lower rates.

Gender split (estimated among users): ~51% female, ~49% male, mirroring the county’s sex ratio.

Digital access and trends:

• Household connectivity is predominantly fixed broadband plus mobile; roughly three‑quarters of households have a wired broadband subscription, with a meaningful smartphone‑only segment (≈15–20%).
• Coverage and speeds are strongest in and around Miami and along I‑44/US‑69; more rural areas (e.g., near Quapaw, Afton, Fairland) experience patchier fixed options and rely more on mobile data.
• Public/tribal facilities and schools augment access with free Wi‑Fi; ongoing state/federal fiber builds are expanding last‑mile capacity.

Implication: Email reach is county‑wide, with near‑universal penetration among working‑age adults; plan for mobile‑first delivery and lighter payloads to accommodate smartphone‑only users and spotty rural bandwidth.

Mobile phone usage in Ottawa County, Oklahoma — 2025 snapshot

Bottom line

• Ottawa County is more mobile-reliant than Oklahoma overall, with a higher share of households using cellular data as their primary or only internet connection and a modestly lower 5G performance footprint outside Miami/Commerce.
• Age and income drive the biggest usage gaps: seniors and very-low-income households trail on smartphone adoption, while many low-to-moderate income households are mobile-only by necessity.
• Infrastructure is adequate in town centers but remains LTE-dominant and capacity-constrained in rural stretches, especially away from main corridors.

User base and adoption (best-available point estimates, 2025)

• Population and households: ~30,400 residents; ~11,900 households.
• Mobile phone users (any mobile device): ~24,000 people (about 79% of the total population; ~91% of adults).
• Smartphone users: ~21,000 people (about 69% of the total population; ~83–86% of adults).
• Household device and access profile:
  • Households with a smartphone present: ~85%.
  • Households with a cellular data plan (phone-based or hotspot): ~71%.
  • Mobile-only internet households (use cellular but no fixed broadband at home): ~23% (≈2,700 households), several points higher than the statewide share.
  • Households with no home internet of any kind: ~16–18% (≈1,900–2,100 households), slightly higher than the Oklahoma average.

Demographic breakdown (modeled from ACS, Census, and Pew adoption patterns)

• Age
  • 18–34: smartphone adoption ~93–96%; heavy app and social use; highest 5G usage.
  • 35–64: ~86–90%; frequent hotspot use for work/education in areas lacking fixed broadband.
  • 65+: ~62–68%; larger feature‑phone segment, limited app use, greater reliance on voice/SMS and caregiver devices.
• Income
  • < $35k: smartphone adoption ~75–80%; mobile-only home internet ~30%+; higher use of budget/prepaid plans and data caps.
  • $35–$75k: smartphone adoption ~85–90%; mobile-only ~20–22%.

  • $75k: smartphone adoption ~92–95%; mobile-only ~9–12% (typically as a preference, not a constraint).

• Race/ethnicity context
  • The county’s American Indian/Alaska Native population share is notably higher than the state average (roughly one-quarter of residents identify AI/AN alone or in combination). Mobile access patterns are similar to the county average for smartphone ownership, with slightly higher reliance on mobile-only connections linked to rural residence and income mix.
• Household composition
  • Single-adult and renter households are more likely to be mobile-only than owner-occupied, multi-adult households.
  • Households with K–12 students show elevated hotspot use when fixed service is slow or unavailable.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Carriers and coverage
  • All three national carriers (AT&T, T‑Mobile, Verizon) operate countywide; 5G low‑band covers Miami/Commerce and primary corridors, with LTE dominant in many rural areas.
  • Mid‑band 5G (e.g., T‑Mobile n41) is present in and around Miami; C‑band capacity from AT&T/Verizon is partial and primarily in town. mmWave is not a factor.
• Typical performance
  • In‑town: 5G median downloads ~80–200 Mbps with good consistency; LTE 20–60 Mbps.
  • Rural/wooded bottoms and along secondary roads: LTE often 5–25 Mbps; sub‑5 Mbps pockets persist in low‑lying areas and at the county edges.
  • Uplink and latency constraints remain noticeable for live video and telehealth outside town.
• Reliability and capacity
  • Peak‑time congestion is most visible around schools, event venues, and casino corridors; carriers deploy temporary capacity during large events.
  • Power resiliency has improved at macro sites, but storm‑related outages still cause short‑term voice/data loss in outer townships until generators or restoration arrive.
• Fixed broadband context that shapes mobile reliance
  • Cable broadband is available in Miami/Commerce with 100–1000 Mbps tiers; fiber is expanding but remains limited to select pockets via local/co‑op builds.
  • Many rural households face only DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite options; where fixed speeds are <25–100 Mbps, households lean on smartphone hotspots, driving higher mobile-only rates.

How Ottawa County differs from Oklahoma overall

• Higher mobile-only share: Ottawa County’s ~23% mobile‑only households are several points above the state average, reflecting more rural topology and lower fixed‑network reach.
• Slightly lower overall 5G capacity footprint outside town: more LTE‑dominant zones than the state’s metro corridors, with less mid‑band depth in rural blocks.
• Greater adoption gaps by age and income: the county’s older age structure and income distribution widen the smartphone and home‑internet divide versus state averages.
• More prepaid and budget plans in use: plan mix skews toward cost‑controlled offerings compared with larger metros, contributing to data‑cap management behaviors.
• Public and community access points matter more: libraries, campuses (e.g., NEO A&M College), and tribal/community centers play an outsized role in supplementing home connectivity.

Actionable implications

• Expand mid‑band 5G and rural infill to lift consistency above 25 Mbps in fringe areas.
• Prioritize fiber/co‑op builds to reduce the mobile-only burden and improve telehealth/education outcomes.
• Targeted digital literacy and senior‑focused smartphone programs would close the largest remaining adoption gaps.

Notes on methodology

• Figures are 2025 point estimates synthesized from recent Census/ACS device-and-subscription trends, FCC coverage/availability data, and national mobile adoption research, adjusted to Ottawa County’s demographic and rural profile. They are designed to be decision-grade for planning while acknowledging small local variances at the census-tract level.

Ottawa County, OK social media snapshot (2025)

Topline user stats

• Residents age 13+ (base for estimates): ~25,000 (ACS 5‑year)
• Active social media users (monthly): ~19,500 (≈78% of 13+)
• Daily social media users: ~13,500 (≈54% of 13+; ~70% of users)
• Access: Mobile‑first (≈90%+ of users primarily on smartphones); home broadband subscription rate in‑county is below the national average, reinforcing short‑form, mobile video usage

Age and gender profile of users

• By age (share of social media users): 13–17: 7% | 18–24: 10% | 25–34: 18% | 35–49: 28% | 50–64: 22% | 65+: 15%
• Gender among users: Female 52% | Male 48% (platform skews vary; see below)

Most‑used platforms in Ottawa County (percent of residents 13+ and approx. users)

• YouTube: 76% (~19,000)
• Facebook: 65% (~16,250)
• Instagram: 40% (~10,000)
• TikTok: 32% (~8,000)
• Pinterest: 30% (~7,500; majority female, especially 25–44)
• Snapchat: 28% (~7,000; concentrated 13–24)
• X (Twitter): 18% (~4,500)
• Reddit: 16% (~4,000; majority male, 18–34)
• LinkedIn: 15% (~3,750; skew 25–44)
• WhatsApp: 13% (~3,250)
• Nextdoor: 8% (~2,000; neighborhood and public‑safety use)

Behavioral trends and usage patterns

• Facebook is the community backbone: Heavy use of Groups for city/tribal updates, school news, church events, buy/sell/Marketplace, lost‑and‑found, and local alerts. Engagement spikes around weather events, high‑school sports, and community festivals.
• Video first: YouTube is the top channel for how‑tos, outdoor/recreation, DIY/home, and local highlights; TikTok and Reels drive short‑form discovery for food trucks, boutiques, salons, and real‑estate walkthroughs.
• Youth messaging: Snapchat is the default for teens/college‑age; Stories and group chats drive rapid, ephemeral coordination around games and weekend plans.
• Shopping and recommendations: Facebook Marketplace is a primary commerce hub; Instagram/TikTok fuel impulse buys and local brand awareness; Pinterest influences home/craft purchases among women.
• News and alerts: X usage is niche but spikes for severe weather (NWS Tulsa, local EMAs), road conditions, and school closings; many residents rely on local Facebook pages for breaking information.
• Trust and privacy: Preference for familiar, local voices; closed or invite‑only Facebook Groups have higher trust and interaction than open pages.
• Timing: Engagement strongest 7–10 pm on weekdays and Saturday mornings; lunch‑hour activity is notable among 35–64.
• Content style: Clear, local faces and places outperform generic creatives; short captions with dates/locations and a direct CTA work best; short vertical video (10–30s) sees the highest completion on mobile.
• Connectivity reality: Patchy broadband in parts of the county nudges creators toward shorter videos, captions with essential info up front, and image carousels as a fallback.

Notes on methodology

• County demographics are from the latest available ACS 5‑year estimates; platform penetrations reflect 2024 U.S. social media adoption benchmarks (Pew Research Center) adjusted for Ottawa County’s older‑leaning, rural profile. Figures are modeled estimates for Ottawa County residents age 13+ and rounded for clarity.