Gilliam County

Key demographics — Gilliam County, Oregon (most recent available)

• Population: ~2,000 (2020 Census: 1,995; ACS 2019–2023 estimate ≈ 1,950–2,000)
• Age:
  • Median age: ~50 years
  • Under 18: ~20–21%
  • 65 and over: ~25–27%
• Sex:
  • Male: ~50–51%
  • Female: ~49–50%
• Race/ethnicity (ACS 2019–2023, shares may not sum to 100 due to overlap):
  • White alone: ~88–92%
  • White, non-Hispanic: ~84–88%
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~8–10%
  • Two or more races: ~3–5%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1–3%
  • Asian: <1%
  • Black or African American: <1%
• Households:
  • Total households: ~900–950
  • Average household size: ~2.1 persons
  • Family households: ~58–62% of households
  • Married-couple families: ~48–50% of households
  • Households with children under 18: ~25–28%
  • Nonfamily households: ~38–42%
  • Householder living alone: ~35–38%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Due to the county’s small population, ACS margins of error are relatively large; figures shown as ranges reflect that.

Gilliam County, OR snapshot (population ~2,000; ~1.6 people/sq. mile across ~1,200 sq. miles)

• Estimated email users: 1,200–1,500 residents. Method: ~1,600 adults and 75–90% email adoption (lower on the rural/older end).
• Age pattern:
  • 18–34: near-universal email use; mobile-first.
  • 35–64: very high use for work, agriculture, and services.
  • 65+: sizable share of county; email use lower but growing, often via smartphones/tablets.
• Gender split: roughly even population; no meaningful gender gap in email use.
• Digital access trends:
  • Home internet subscription is below the Oregon average; many households rely on basic DSL, fixed wireless, or smartphone-only plans.
  • Stronger broadband and cellular coverage along the I‑84/Columbia River corridor near Arlington; more gaps and slower speeds in interior areas (e.g., around Condon/Lonerock) due to terrain and low density.
  • Public anchors (schools, libraries, county facilities) are key access points; residents commonly use public Wi‑Fi for large attachments and account setup.
  • Ongoing rural broadband grants and middle‑mile buildouts are gradually improving reliability and speeds.
• Local density/connectivity fact: Extremely low population density and long last‑mile runs raise per‑user costs, slowing fiber-to-home deployment versus urban Oregon.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Gilliam County, Oregon

High-level picture

• Gilliam County is very small and rural (about 2,000 residents), with an older-than-average population and large agricultural/transportation footprint. Mobile adoption is widespread but skews more toward basic voice/SMS reliability and coverage along highways than toward cutting-edge 5G use. Gaps away from highways and towns shape behavior (Wi‑Fi calling, fixed wireless, and satellite as complements).

User estimates (order-of-magnitude, method-based)

• Residents: ~2,000 (2020 Census; population has been roughly flat to slightly declining).
• Adults (18+): ~1,600–1,700 (rural counties in OR typically ~80–85% adult).
• Any mobile phone users: ~1,450–1,600 adults (assumes 90–95% cellphone ownership in rural areas).
• Smartphone users: ~1,200–1,400 adults (assumes ~75–85% smartphone adoption in rural/small-population counties).
• Primary carrier mix (qualitative): Verizon tends to be the default for coverage outside towns; AT&T strong along I‑84 and in town centers; T‑Mobile has improved low‑band coverage but fewer rural macros. Result: higher Verizon share than statewide; T‑Mobile share lower than in Portland metro.

Demographic usage patterns

• Age: The county skews older (share of 65+ is materially higher than Oregon overall). Smartphone adoption among seniors trails state averages; basic phones and simplified plans remain more common. Younger residents and families show near-universal smartphone use, but they are a smaller share of the population than statewide.
• Income and plan types: With lower median incomes than Oregon overall, prepaid and MVNO plans are used more often, and device replacement cycles are longer (3–5 years vs. 2–3 in urban areas). Tethering from phones as a backup to home internet is common.
• Work profile: Agriculture, trucking, and energy (wind) drive daytime mobility. Business lines, push-to-talk apps, and FirstNet (public safety) usage are concentrated along transportation corridors and job sites, with paper/radio backups where coverage drops.
• Language/ethnicity: A modest Hispanic/Latino population contributes to higher use of messaging/VoIP apps with international features compared with the county’s size.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Cellular footprint: A handful of macro sites cluster along I‑84 (Arlington) and near Condon/Lonerock/OR‑19 and OR‑206 corridors. Coverage is strong on the interstate and in towns; canyons, wheat country, and interior plateaus have notable dead zones and edge-of-cell indoor coverage.
• 5G: Present primarily along I‑84 and select town sites (low/mid‑band, carrier-dependent). Large areas remain LTE-only. mmWave is not material.
• Backhaul: Fiber follows regional highway and utility routes near the Columbia River; elsewhere, microwave backhaul is common, which can constrain rural capacity.
• At home: Town centers have limited fiber or upgraded cable/DSL via local providers and co-ops; outside town limits, fixed wireless (WISPs) and satellite (including Starlink) are prevalent. Many households rely on Wi‑Fi calling; some use mobile hotspots as a fallback.
• Resilience: Wildfire and power-event resilience depends on a small number of tower sites; backup power varies by site and carrier, so extended outages can widen “no‑service” areas.

How Gilliam County differs from Oregon overall

• Coverage, not speed, drives carrier choice: Residents prioritize highway/town reliability; Verizon share is higher than statewide, T‑Mobile lower.
• Lower smartphone penetration and slower upgrade cycles: Especially among 65+, producing fewer high-end 5G devices in use than in urban Oregon.
• Heavier reliance on prepaid/MVNO and Wi‑Fi calling: Cost sensitivity and indoor coverage gaps push these behaviors above state averages.
• More LTE-only experience: 5G usage is largely travel-corridor based; interior areas see modest throughput and higher latency than urban Oregon.
• Greater use of satellite and fixed wireless at home: This reduces mobile data offload variability and shapes when/where residents use mobile data.
• Business/operations focus: Agricultural and transportation workflows use mobile mostly for coordination and safety rather than data-heavy consumer apps; data spikes correlate with harvest, highway incidents on I‑84, and seasonal recreation.

Notes on method and sources

• Population and age structure inferred from U.S. Census/ACS patterns for small rural Oregon counties.
• Ownership/adoption rates derived from Pew Research Center national smartphone/cellphone adoption baselines, adjusted downward for rural/senior-heavy areas.
• Coverage/5G characterizations reflect FCC/National Broadband Map patterns, carrier public maps, and typical eastern Oregon rural deployments.
• Given limited county-specific published stats, figures are ranges/estimates intended for planning, not audit. For a project-grade brief, validate with the latest ACS 5‑year tables, FCC/Broadband Office maps, and carrier RF planning data.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot for Gilliam County, Oregon. Direct, statistically representative county‑level social media data aren’t published; figures are modeled from the county’s size/age profile (U.S. Census/ACS) and Pew Research Center’s 2024 social‑media benchmarks, with rural adjustments. Treat ranges as estimates.

Population baseline

• Residents: about 2,000; median age near 50 (older than U.S. average).
• Adults (18+): roughly 1,550–1,650.
• Estimated social media users (13+): about 1,200–1,350 residents use at least one platform monthly (roughly 70–80% of adults; teens are highly active).

Most‑used platforms (share of local social media users; estimated ranges)

• YouTube: 75–85%
• Facebook: 70–80%
• Instagram: 30–40%
• TikTok: 20–30%
• Pinterest: 25–35% (skews female, 30+)
• Snapchat: 15–25% (skews under 30)
• WhatsApp: 15–20%
• X/Twitter: 10–15%
• Reddit: 10–15% (skews male, under 40)
• LinkedIn: 8–12%
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (varies by neighborhood coverage)

Age groups (share of local users and platform skews; estimates)

• 13–17: ~7–9% of users; YouTube 95%+, TikTok 70–80%, Snapchat 70–80%, Instagram 60–70%, Facebook 20–30%.
• 18–29: ~12–15%; YouTube 90%+, Instagram 75–80%, TikTok 60–70%, Snapchat 60–65%, Facebook 50–60%.
• 30–49: ~30–35%; Facebook 80–85%, YouTube 85–90%, Instagram 45–55%, TikTok 35–45%, Pinterest 35–45%.
• 50–64: ~25–30%; Facebook 75–85%, YouTube 75–85%, Pinterest 30–40%, Instagram 25–35%, TikTok 15–25%.
• 65+: ~15–20%; Facebook 65–75%, YouTube 60–70%, Pinterest 20–30%, Instagram 15–20%, TikTok 5–10%, some Nextdoor.

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall users: roughly even male/female.
• Women: higher on Facebook and especially Pinterest; slightly higher on Instagram.
• Men: higher on YouTube, Reddit, and X/Twitter.

Behavioral trends observed in similar rural Oregon communities

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy use of Groups for local news, school sports, events, buy/sell/trade, lost/found, emergency/wildfire and weather updates, and road conditions.
• YouTube is broadly used for how‑to content, machinery/repair, outdoor/hunting, and local recordings of school or civic events.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger and SMS are preferred for quick coordination (appointments, gigs, pickups).
• Posting cadence: engagement peaks before work (6–8 a.m.) and after dinner (7–9 p.m.); weekends midday perform well. During emergencies (fires, storms), spikes are immediate and high.
• Content formats: simple photo posts, flyers, and short native videos perform well on Facebook; vertical short‑form for TikTok/Instagram Reels among under‑40s; longer instructional or event videos on YouTube.
• Trust/voice: posts from recognizable local people, businesses, schools, sheriff/emergency pages get outsized reach; low tolerance for anonymous or “outsider” accounts.
• Seasonal rhythm: harvest and hunting seasons drive more equipment/how‑to and buy/sell chatter; winter brings road closure and weather updates; community events/school calendars drive predictable surges.
• Marketplace behavior: high reliance on Facebook Marketplace and local swap groups for farm/ranch equipment, vehicles, home goods.
• Connectivity constraints: some users favor lower‑bandwidth content (photos/text) and offline coordination due to patchy coverage.

Sources and method

• U.S. Census Bureau/ACS (population, age structure; rural profile of Gilliam County).
• Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2024; rural‑urban adoption patterns. Figures above adapt national platform penetration to an older, rural county profile.