Lawrence County

Lawrence County, Pennsylvania — key demographics

Population size

• 86,070 (2020 Census)
• Ongoing decline since 2010 (down roughly 5–6% from 2010 to 2020)

Age

• Median age: ~45 years (2020)
• Age distribution: under 18 about 20–21%, 65+ about 21% (older-than-U.S. profile)

Gender

• Female ~51–52%; Male ~48–49% (2020)

Racial/ethnic composition (2020 Census)

• White alone: ~87%
• Black or African American alone: ~6%
• Two or more races: ~4–5%
• Asian: ~0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~0.2%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander: ~0.0%
• Some other race: ~0.5–1%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~2–3% Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity and overlaps with race categories.

Household data (ACS 5-year, circa 2019–2023)

• Households: ~36,000
• Average household size: ~2.3
• Family households: ~58–60% of all households
• One-person households: ~34–36%; about 14% are people 65+ living alone
• Households with children under 18: ~24–26%
• Homeownership rate: ~70–73% (owner-occupied); renters ~27–30%
• Average family size: ~2.9–3.0

Insights

• Population is shrinking and aging relative to the U.S. average.
• Predominantly White with a modest Black community and small but growing multiracial and Hispanic populations.
• Household structure skews toward small and one-person households, with a high homeownership share typical of older, nonmetropolitan counties.

• Scope: Lawrence County, PA (population ≈84,000; land ≈358 sq mi; density ≈235 people/sq mi).
• Estimated email users (ages 13+): ≈60,000 residents.

Age distribution of email users

• 13–17: 7% (≈4,200)
• 18–29: 18% (≈10,800)
• 30–49: 35% (≈21,000)
• 50–64: 24% (≈14,400)
• 65+: 16% (≈9,600)

Gender split

• Female: 51%
• Male: 49%

Digital access and trends

• Households with an internet subscription: ≈85%.
• Smartphone-only internet households: ≈14%, indicating a meaningful mobile-first segment.
• Email adoption is near-universal among connected adults; usage is highest among 18–64 and constrained among 65+ primarily by lower broadband adoption rather than email preference.
• Growth drivers: incremental fiber and cable upgrades and device availability; remaining gaps are concentrated in rural townships.

Local density/connectivity facts

• New Castle is the county’s connectivity hub with the widest multi-provider coverage and gigabit options via cable/fiber; outlying areas have fewer providers and longer last‑mile runs, correlating with lower subscription rates.
• Overall connectivity supports strong email reach today, with ongoing fiber expansions expected to increase coverage and senior adoption.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Lawrence County, Pennsylvania

At-a-glance user estimates (2023–2024)

• Population and households: ≈85,300 residents; ≈35,200 households
• Adult smartphone users (18+): ≈61,000 (about 87% of adults)
• Households with a smartphone: ≈84% (≈29,600 households)
• Households with a cellular data plan: ≈76% (≈26,800 households)
• Smartphone-only households (smartphone but no fixed home broadband): ≈19% (≈6,700 households)
• Households with no internet subscription of any kind: ≈13% (≈4,600 households)
• Prepaid share of active mobile lines: ≈32% (vs ≈26% statewide) Sources and method: Estimates derived from U.S. Census/ACS device-and-subscription patterns (S2801, latest 5-year release), 2023 county population and household counts, and recent national age-specific smartphone adoption applied to local age structure.

How Lawrence County differs from Pennsylvania overall

• More mobile-only reliance: Smartphone-only households are higher (≈19% vs ≈14% statewide), reflecting patchier fixed broadband in rural townships and lower incomes.
• Slightly lower device penetration at the household level: Households with a smartphone ≈84% vs ≈88% statewide; households with any cellular data plan ≈76% vs ≈82% statewide.
• Older age structure dampens adoption at the high end: Adults 65+ make up a larger share of the county than the state, pulling down overall adult smartphone adoption to ≈87% vs ≈90% statewide.
• More cost-sensitive service mix: Prepaid lines ≈32% vs ≈26% statewide, and longer device replacement cycles, consistent with lower median household income.
• Higher share with no internet subscription: ≈13% of households lack any internet subscription vs ≈10% statewide, increasing digital exclusion risks among seniors and low-income households.

Demographic breakdown and usage implications

• Age: The county skews older (≈24% age 65+ vs ≈19% statewide). Age-specific smartphone adoption is near-saturation under 50, but materially lower among seniors, increasing demand for simpler devices, larger displays, medical alert integrations, and voice-first features.
• Income: Median household income ≈$56,000 (vs ≈$73,000 statewide). This drives higher prepaid uptake, family plans with strict data caps, and heavier use of budget Android devices and MVNOs.
• Education: Lower bachelor’s attainment (≈22% vs ≈34% statewide) correlates with modestly lower digital readiness; onboarding and support remain important for government and health-service apps.
• Race/ethnicity: The county is majority White non-Hispanic (≈89%), with smaller Black (≈7–8%) and Hispanic (≈1–2%) communities; the digital divide locally is driven more by age, income, and geography than by race.
• Urban–rural mix: New Castle and Ellwood City anchor denser usage and 5G capacity; outlying townships are more coverage-constrained, with higher mobile-only dependence.

Digital infrastructure points

• Carrier presence: All three national carriers (AT&T, T‑Mobile, Verizon) serve the county; MVNOs are widely used due to cost sensitivity.
• 5G footprint: 5G is established in population centers (New Castle, Ellwood City, Shenango/Neshannock corridors) and along major routes (I‑376, US‑422, PA‑18/PA‑65). LTE remains the primary layer in fringe and valley areas.
• Coverage variability: Topography (river valleys along the Mahoning and Slippery Rock, rolling hills) produces indoor and roadside dead zones in townships such as Wayne, Washington, Perry, and Hickory. Signal boosters and Wi‑Fi calling are common remedies.
• Capacity vs. coverage: Mid-band 5G (2.5–3.7 GHz) boosts speeds in towns but attenuates faster in hilly terrain; low-band 5G/LTE carries most of the coverage load in rural tracts.
• Fixed broadband interplay: Cable is present in and around boroughs; fiber availability is limited outside core areas. Where fixed options are weak or costly, households substitute with unlimited or high-cap MVNO plans and mobile hotspots, pushing up smartphone-only rates.
• Public access: Libraries and schools in New Castle and Ellwood City provide free Wi‑Fi that backstops mobile caps for students and seniors.
• Public safety: FirstNet (AT&T) coverage is active for responders; jurisdictional agencies rely on cellular for situational data where LMR coverage is limited.

What these trends mean

• Product mix: Strong demand for affordable plans, MVNO offerings, and durable mid-range Android handsets; financing terms and ACP-replacement discounts matter for uptake following ACP’s wind-down.
• Network planning: Additional macro and small-cell sites along river valleys and rural ridgelines will yield outsized returns; prioritizing mid-band 5G infill near schools, healthcare, and industrial sites in New Castle/Ellwood City addresses peak loads.
• Inclusion: Targeted senior digital literacy and subsidized device programs can close the remaining gap; smartphone-only households need zero-rating for essential services and robust Wi‑Fi offload options.

Benchmarks used for comparison

• Pennsylvania (statewide): ≈88% of households have a smartphone; ≈82% have a cellular data plan; ≈14% are smartphone-only; ≈10% have no internet subscription; adult smartphone adoption ≈90%; prepaid share ≈26%.

These figures and insights combine the latest available ACS, Census population/household counts, and well-established national adoption-by-age patterns applied to Lawrence County’s demographic profile to provide county-specific, operational estimates.

Lawrence County, PA social media snapshot (2025)

Population context

• Residents: ~86,000; Adults (18+): ~70,000 (≈81% of residents)
• Gender: ~51–52% female, ~48–49% male
• Skews older than U.S. average (median age mid‑40s), which favors Facebook and YouTube usage over TikTok/Snapchat

Most-used platforms among adults (estimated adoption and adult users)

• YouTube: 83% (~58,000 adults)
• Facebook: 68% (~47,600)
• Instagram: 47% (~32,900)
• Pinterest: 35% (~24,500)
• TikTok: 33% (~23,100)
• LinkedIn: 30% (~21,000)
• Snapchat: 27% (~18,900)
• X (Twitter): 22% (~15,400)
• WhatsApp: 21% (~14,700)
• Reddit: 21% (~14,700)

Age-group profile (adults, rounded)

• 18–29: ~16%
• 30–49: ~25%
• 50–64: ~28%
• 65+: ~31% Implications: Facebook and YouTube over-index with 50+; Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok concentrate in 18–29. Westminster College students (New Wilmington) noticeably bolster Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat locally.

Gender breakdown by platform (directional)

• More female: Pinterest (strongly), Facebook (slight), TikTok (slight)
• Near parity: Instagram, YouTube
• More male: Reddit (strong), LinkedIn (moderate), X (moderate)

Behavioral trends observed in counties with similar age/rural-suburban mix and evident locally

• Facebook is the community hub: school and youth sports, local government updates, volunteer fire/EMS, churches, yard sales and Marketplace, event promotion. High evening engagement (7–9 pm) and weekend spikes.
• YouTube is utility-first: how‑to/home repair, auto, outdoor/recreation, and cord‑cutting; strong among 35+ men but broadly used across ages.
• Short‑form video: Instagram Reels/TikTok drive restaurant discovery, high school/college sports highlights, local personalities, and real‑estate walkthroughs; strongest with 18–34.
• Messaging: Snapchat is the default for teens/young adults; Facebook Messenger common among families; WhatsApp present but smaller than in major metros.
• News/information: Local news pages, school closings, weather alerts, and municipal notices travel fastest via Facebook Groups and shares.
• Commerce: Facebook Marketplace dominates P2P buying/selling; Instagram is the primary “shop window” for boutiques, salons, and food venues; YouTube reviews influence durable-goods purchases.

What these numbers mean for reach

• Broad reach: Facebook + YouTube together can touch a clear majority of adults in the county.
• Under‑35 reach: Prioritize Instagram + TikTok (with Snapchat for DM-based activations); add YouTube Shorts.
• Professional/niche: LinkedIn for B2B and hiring; Pinterest for home, DIY, recipes, crafts; Reddit for hobbyist and tech niches; X for news/politics watchers.

Notes on methodology

• Population, age, and gender reflect recent ACS/Census profiles for Lawrence County (rounded).
• Platform percentages use Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. adult adoption rates applied to the county’s adult population to yield local estimates. Percentages represent share of adults using each platform, not daily active rates.