Coos County

Coos County, Oregon — key demographics

Population size

• 64,929 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age (ACS 2018–2022, 5-year)

• Median age: ~49 years
• Under 18: ~18–19%
• 65 and over: ~27–28%

Gender (ACS 2018–2022)

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Race/ethnicity (ACS 2018–2022)

• White, non-Hispanic: ~81–82%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~8–9%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~6%
• American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~3–4%
• Asian, non-Hispanic: ~1–2%
• Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~1%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic: ~0.3%

Households and housing (ACS 2018–2022)

• Total households: ~28–29k
• Persons per household: ~2.2
• Family households: ~60% of households
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate: ~67–68%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census (population total) and American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates (age, sex, race/ethnicity, household/housing).

Coos County, OR email usage (estimates based on Pew Research, ACS, and FCC patterns applied to local demographics):

• Population: ~65,000; adults ~52,000–54,000.
• Estimated email users: ~49,000 adults (≈90–95% of adults). Including teens, total residents with email accounts likely ~50,000–53,000.

Age distribution of users (share using email):

• 18–49: ~95–99% (near-universal).
• 50–64: ~90–95%.
• 65+: ~80–85% (older county profile modestly lowers senior adoption).

Gender split:

• Roughly even; the county is slightly female-majority (~51% female), and email adoption by gender is effectively equal, so users are ~50/50.

Digital access trends and connectivity:

• About 80–85% of households report a broadband subscription (ACS 5-year), with notable gaps in rural tracts; ~10% are likely smartphone-only.
• FCC maps show uneven availability of 100/20 Mbps fixed broadband, with coastal/forested terrain contributing to patchy service.
• Public libraries and schools are important access points for those without home broadband.

Local density/connectivity context:

• Population density ≈40 people per square mile across ~1,600 square miles; dispersed settlement patterns raise last-mile costs and contribute to access disparities.
• Median age is high (around 50), nudging overall email usage slightly below urban Oregon levels.

Coos County, OR — mobile phone usage snapshot (2024–2025)

How Coos County differs from Oregon overall

• Slightly lower smartphone adoption and a higher share of basic/feature phones, driven by an older age profile, lower median income, and more rural terrain than the state average.
• Higher likelihood of mobile-only internet households (relying on a cellphone for home internet) due to patchier wired options outside Coos Bay/North Bend.
• More single-carrier dependence in outlying areas and more prepaid/MVNO use, reflecting coverage gaps and price sensitivity.
• 5G mid-band coverage is sparse outside the Coos Bay–North Bend urban core; much of the county is still on LTE or low-band 5G, lagging well behind the I‑5 corridor metros.

User estimates

• Population baseline: ~64–66k residents; adults (18+) ~51–53k.
• Any mobile phone (voice/text):
  • Adults: ~90–93% → roughly 46.5k–49k adult users.
  • Including teens and some older children, total county mobile users: ~50k–54k (about 78–84% of all residents).
• Smartphones:
  • Adults: ~80–85% → roughly 41k–45k adult smartphone users.
  • Adding teens (very high adoption): total smartphone users countywide likely ~45k–49k.
• Mobile-only internet households:
  • Estimated 18–24% in Coos vs roughly 12–15% statewide, reflecting lower wireline availability/affordability in rural zones.
• Plan mix:
  • Prepaid/MVNO share likely 30–35% in Coos vs ~20–25% statewide, driven by income, credit constraints, and seasonal usage patterns.

Demographic breakdown (directional differences vs state)

• Age:
  • 18–34: near-saturation smartphone use (~93–97%), similar to Oregon overall.
  • 35–64: high adoption (~88–92%), slightly below state.
  • 65+: notably lower smartphone adoption (~65–72% in Coos vs ~75–80% statewide); more basic phones and shared/family plans.
• Income/affordability:
  • Lower-income households show higher prepaid usage, smaller data buckets, and more Wi‑Fi offload at libraries, schools, and coffee shops. Lifeline/ACP-like discount participation (or successor programs) tends to run higher than the state average.
• Geography:
  • Coos Bay–North Bend: device and 5G adoption closest to state norms; multiple-carrier choice, higher data-plan tiers.
  • Rural interior/coastal headlands: more single-carrier reliance, weaker indoor signal, and more Wi‑Fi-first behavior at home.
• Tribal and vulnerable populations:
  • Tribal households and residents with disabilities (a higher share than the state average) face compounded affordability and coverage barriers; hotspot lending and community Wi‑Fi play a larger role than in metro Oregon.

Digital infrastructure points (what’s on the ground)

• Coverage pattern:
  • Strongest multi-carrier coverage along US‑101 and in Coos Bay–North Bend; variable service along OR‑42 and in forested canyons/valleys where terrain blocks signal.
  • 5G today is mostly low-band outside town; mid-band 5G is concentrated around Coos Bay–North Bend. Expect slower 5G device uptake than in Portland/Willamette Valley due to patchy performance outside cores.
• Backhaul and last mile:
  • Fiber runs along main corridors and to key anchor institutions; cable broadband is available in town centers. Many rural areas rely on older DSL, fixed wireless, or satellite—this pushes some households toward mobile-only connectivity.
• Towers/sites:
  • Fewer macro sites per square mile than urban Oregon; microwave backhaul still used for some remote sites. Seasonal tourist load along the coast can congest certain sectors on summer weekends.
• Public safety and resilience:
  • FirstNet Band 14 coverage is present along primary corridors and around public-safety hubs but remains intermittent in remote tracts; coastal storms and power outages expose gaps where sites lack extended backup power.
• Community access:
  • Libraries, schools, healthcare facilities, and tribal centers are important Wi‑Fi anchors, with device/hotspot lending more prevalent than in metro counties.

Key trends to watch (vs state)

• Gradual infill of 5G mid-band sectors from Coos Bay–North Bend outward; LTE remains the practical baseline in much of the county for the near term.
• Expansion of fiber-fed fixed wireless and cooperative/municipal fiber that could reduce mobile-only reliance over time.
• Ongoing shift from basic to smartphones among seniors, but at a slower pace than state averages.
• Potential consolidation of carrier options at the fringes, which may further concentrate market share and affect pricing/plan flexibility locally.

Notes on method and uncertainty

• Estimates synthesize Census/ACS population structure, national smartphone adoption benchmarks (e.g., Pew/NTIA), rural vs urban deltas, and typical Oregon coastal coverage patterns. Ranges are provided to reflect uncertainty and local variation; for program design or siting, validate with current FCC maps, carrier tools, and on-the-ground drive tests.

Below is a concise, locally tuned snapshot. Figures are modeled from US-level adoption (Pew 2024, DataReportal 2024) adjusted to Coos County’s older age profile (ACS) and should be treated as indicative, not exact.

Population baseline

• Residents: ≈65,000 (ACS). Older-leaning: ≈26% are 65+; median age ≈49.

Estimated social media users

• Any platform: ≈41–47k residents (≈63–72% of total population).
• Adults (18+): ≈70–80% use at least one platform.

Most-used platforms (share of adults; modeled from Pew 2024)

• YouTube: ~80–85%
• Facebook: ~65–70%
• Instagram: ~45–50%
• TikTok: ~30–35% (lower overall due to older mix)
• Snapchat: ~25–30% (concentrated under 30)
• Pinterest: ~30–35% (women-heavy)
• X/Twitter: ~20–25%
• LinkedIn: ~20–30% (lighter engagement locally)

Age groups (how/where they engage)

• 13–17: Very high daily use; TikTok/Snap/YouTube dominant; Instagram stories; little Facebook posting.
• 18–34: Heavy Instagram + TikTok + Snap; YouTube for entertainment/how‑to; Facebook mostly for events/groups.
• 35–54: Omnichannel; Facebook + Instagram + YouTube; Marketplace, school/league groups, local news.
• 55–64: Facebook + YouTube core; Pinterest for projects/recipes; limited TikTok usage.
• 65+: Facebook primary (groups, local pages); YouTube rising for how‑to/news; minimal Instagram/TikTok but growing.

Gender breakdown (modeled from national skews + local sex ratio)

• Overall users: ~52% women, ~48% men.
• Platform skews: Pinterest strongly female; Instagram/TikTok slightly female; Reddit/X more male; Facebook roughly even.

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first: Facebook Groups and Marketplace are central for local news, yard sales, events, lost & found, emergency/wildfire/road alerts.
• Video-forward: Short-form (Reels/TikTok/Shorts) drives discovery; YouTube for DIY, outdoor, fishing, repair, RV/homesteading.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is default for businesses; Snap among teens/young adults; SMS still common with older adults.
• Engagement timing: Evenings and weekend mornings see the most activity; weather/road-closure posts spike engagement.
• Purchase path: FB/IG posts or local groups → website/Google Maps/call; reviews and simple coupons/seasonal promos perform well.
• Content that works: Local faces and places, before/after transformations, high-utility tips, event recaps, giveaways, outdoors/scenery.

Sources and method

• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use (2024); DataReportal USA (2024); U.S. Census/ACS for Coos County age structure. County-level platform user counts aren’t published; figures above are modeled estimates.