Chester County

Here are current, high-level demographics for Chester County, South Carolina. Figures are rounded; use ACS 2019–2023 5‑year estimates and 2020 Census for reference.

• Population

  • Total: ~32,200–32,400 (2023 est.); 32,294 (2020 Census)

• Age

  • Median age: ~42 years
  • Under 18: ~22%
  • 65 and over: ~19%

• Gender

  • Female: ~51%
  • Male: ~49%

• Race/ethnicity (Hispanic can be any race)

  • White (non-Hispanic): ~53–55%
  • Black or African American: ~39–41%
  • Hispanic/Latino: ~3–5%
  • Two or more races: ~2–3%
  • Asian: ~0.5–1%
  • Other (including American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander): <1%

• Households

  • Number of households: ~12,200–12,600
  • Average household size: ~2.5
  • Family households: ~65–70% of households
  • Married-couple families: ~40–47% of households
  • Households with children under 18: ~25–30%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5‑year estimates (DP05, S0101, DP02).

Chester County, SC has ~32k residents (2023), ~25k adults. Estimated email users: 20–23k residents (≈80–90% of adults), plus some teens.

Age:

• Under 18 (~22%): mostly school-based use.
• 18–34: ~95% use email.
• 35–64: ~90%.
• 65+: ~70–75%.

Gender: ~51% female, 49% male; email adoption is similar by gender.

Digital access: Roughly three-quarters of households have home broadband; 10–15% are smartphone‑only; 20–25% lack home internet. Public Wi‑Fi via libraries/schools is important. Fiber and fixed‑wireless are expanding; towns along I‑77 (Richburg, Chester, Fort Lawn) have denser service, while rural western/southern areas remain spottier. Cellular 4G/5G is strongest near corridors and towns, weaker in forested/lowland pockets.

Local density/connectivity: Population density ≈55 people/sq mi. Dispersed housing and lower median incomes raise last‑mile costs and subscription churn, but industrial growth near I‑77 is improving backhaul and provider investment.

Below is a county-level snapshot built from recent ACS demographics, Pew mobile adoption patterns, FCC coverage data, and rural SC market norms. Figures are modeled estimates for 2024–2025 and shown as ranges to reflect uncertainty. Comparisons are to South Carolina statewide averages.

Headline estimates for Chester County

• Population/households: ~32,000 residents; ~12,000 households.
• Adult smartphone users: 21,000–23,500 adults (about 84–92% of adults vs ~89–91% statewide).
• Total active mobile lines (incl. children, work, wearables): 28,000–33,000.
• Smartphone-only internet households (no fixed broadband): 15–22% (higher than SC ~10–14%).
• Prepaid share of mobile subscribers: 35–45% (higher than SC ~25–35%).

Demographic breakdown (how Chester differs from the state)

• Age
  • 65+ adoption: ~70–78% in Chester vs ~78–83% statewide; larger age gap persists. Older residents are more likely to keep voice/text–centric plans and basic devices.
  • 18–34 adoption: ~95–98% (in line with state), but heavier smartphone dependence (mobile as primary internet) than statewide peers.
• Income
  • Low-income (≤200% FPL) adoption: ~82–88% (near state), but smartphone-only reliance is markedly higher (25–35% vs ~18–22% statewide). Prepaid and ACP/Lifeline participation are relatively high; data caps shape usage.
• Race/ethnicity
  • Black residents (a larger share of Chester County than SC overall) show smartphone adoption close to county average but higher smartphone dependence for home internet. This compositional effect pushes countywide smartphone-only rates above the SC average.
  • Hispanic residents (small but growing share) show very high adoption and above-average use of messaging apps and hotspotting, similar to statewide trends.
• Device mix and behavior
  • More people rely on a single handset rather than a phone-plus-tablet/PC bundle compared with the state.
  • Higher prevalence of hotspotting for homework and remote work; gaming/4K streaming on mobile is less common due to plan limits and coverage variability.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage
  • 4G LTE: Near-universal outdoor coverage along I‑77, US‑321, SC‑9, and in Chester/Great Falls/Fort Lawn; spotty indoor coverage and some outdoor gaps persist in western and low-lying rural areas.
  • 5G: Mid-band 5G is strongest along I‑77 and near the county seat; elsewhere, 5G often falls back to low‑band with 4G‑like speeds.
• Capacity and speeds
  • Typical median mobile download speeds: ~30–60 Mbps in town corridors; ~10–25 Mbps in rural pockets (statewide medians are higher, often ~60–100+ Mbps in metro areas).
  • Peak-time congestion is noticeable near schools, industrial sites, and the I‑77 interchanges; backhaul upgrades have not kept pace with traffic growth in a few sectors.
• Tower density and buildout
  • Fewer macro sites per square mile than SC’s urban counties; recent infill is concentrated near logistics/manufacturing nodes and along I‑77. Rural sectors still rely on older LTE carriers with limited mid‑band 5G carriers deployed.
• Fixed–mobile interplay
  • Fixed wireless access (FWA) from national carriers is available in and around population centers and along I‑77, but eligibility drops off quickly in exurban areas due to signal quality and sector load.
  • Ongoing fiber expansions by regional providers are improving backhaul to some towers, but last-mile fiber remains uneven outside towns—reinforcing smartphone-only behavior for many households.
• Public safety and resilience
  • First responder LTE coverage is robust on primary corridors; off‑corridor dead zones and storm-related outages remain a planning focus.

Trends where Chester County diverges most from the SC average

• Higher smartphone-only internet reliance, driven by income mix and lower fixed-broadband availability outside towns.
• Larger urban–rural performance gap: strong service near I‑77 versus materially slower, less consistent service west/south of the county seat.
• Higher prepaid penetration and sensitivity to data caps, shaping app usage (more messaging and short-form video; less high-bitrate streaming).
• Slower 5G mid‑band rollout off the main corridors, so the step-up from LTE to 5G is smaller for many residents than in metros.
• Older adults lag the state in smartphone adoption and are more likely to keep non-smart/entry devices.

Method note and sources

• Estimates synthesize: ACS 5-year county demographics (computer/Internet indicators), Pew Research Center mobile adoption by age/income, FCC mobile coverage maps, and independent speed-test aggregates for rural SC. Local conditions and carrier build plans can shift quickly; for decisions requiring precision (e.g., siting, marketing), validate with the latest FCC fabric, carrier maps, and drive tests.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot for Chester County, SC. County-level social media figures aren’t officially published; numbers are modeled from Pew Research Center (2023–2024) U.S. adoption rates adjusted for a rural South Carolina profile and local age mix. Treat them as estimates.

Headline user stats

• Population base: ~32,000 (county). Adults 18+: ~25,000.
• Estimated social media users (13+): ~19,000–22,000 people (about 60–68% of the total population; ~70% of adults).

Age mix (share of local social media users, est.)

• 13–17: 8–10%
• 18–29: 18–22%
• 30–49: 33–38%
• 50–64: 22–26%
• 65+: 10–14%

Gender breakdown (est.)

• County population skews slightly female (~52–54%).
• Among social users: Female ~53–56%, Male ~44–47%.
• Platform skew: Women more active on Facebook/Instagram/Pinterest; men more on YouTube/X/Reddit.

Most-used platforms in Chester County (adult reach, est.)

• YouTube: 70–75% use; strong across all ages.
• Facebook: 65–70%; highest daily use; dominant for community info.
• Instagram: 35–40%; strongest under 35.
• TikTok: 30–35%; fast growth among 13–34.
• Snapchat: 20–25%; concentrated in teens/young adults.
• Pinterest: 25–30%; stronger among women and DIY/home interests.
• X (Twitter): 15–20%; news/sports niche.
• WhatsApp: 15–20%; family/church and Hispanic community group chats.
• LinkedIn: 12–18%; lower due to local industry mix.
• Nextdoor: 2–5%; limited neighborhood coverage.

Behavioral trends observed locally

• Facebook as the community hub: school athletics, church announcements, yard sale/“swap & shop,” lost-and-found pets, weather and road updates. County/school/sheriff pages drive emergency and civic info.
• Video-first shift: YouTube for how‑to, hunting/fishing, auto repair, and local sports; Facebook Reels and TikTok for short-form updates and small-business promos.
• Marketplace and micro‑commerce: Heavy Facebook Marketplace use, porch pickup culture, services promoted via before/after photos; Cash App/Venmo common.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger dominates local group chats; WhatsApp used for multilingual/family groups; SMS still common for quick coordination.
• Engagement timing: Peaks evenings (7–10 pm) and weekends; spikes around high school sports, festivals, severe weather, and local news.
• Trust dynamics: High reliance on word-of-mouth in groups; admins moderate for scams/misinformation.
• Advertising takeaway: Geotargeted Facebook/Instagram ads, boosted event posts, and short vertical video perform best; older skew favors Facebook, under‑35 favors Instagram/TikTok.

Notes and method

• Estimates derived from Pew national platform usage and rural-versus-urban differentials applied to Chester County’s age/gender profile; rounded to ranges to reflect uncertainty.
• Broadband/smartphone access in rural SC slightly tempers adoption, but high smartphone penetration keeps short‑video and messaging strong.