Brown County

Here are concise, high-level demographics for Brown County, South Dakota.

Population

• Total: 38,301 (2020 Census)
• 2023 estimate: ~38.5k (Census Bureau, Vintage 2023)

Age (ACS 5-year, approx.)

• Median age: ~38 years
• Under 18: ~22%
• 65 and over: ~19%

Gender (ACS 5-year, approx.)

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race/ethnicity (2020 Census; Hispanic can be any race)

• White alone: ~87–90%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~4–5%
• Black or African American: ~1–2%
• Asian: ~1–2%
• Two or more races: ~3–5%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~3–4%

Households (ACS 5-year, approx.)

• Number of households: ~16,000
• Persons per household: ~2.3
• Family households: ~60% of households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~64%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 5-year estimates).

Brown County, SD context: Population 38–39k across ~1,713 sq mi (≈22 people/sq mi). Aberdeen (28k) holds about 70–75% of residents and most wired infrastructure.

Estimated email users: 28–31k residents (≈75–80% of the population). Assumes ~90–95% of adults and ~80% of teens use email, based on national/Pew benchmarks applied to local age mix.

Age distribution of email users (est. share of users):

• 13–17: 5–6%
• 18–34: 25–30%
• 35–54: 35–40%
• 55–64: 12–15%
• 65+: 15–18% (slightly lower adoption than younger cohorts)

Gender split: ~49–51% each; a small female majority among seniors likely nudges total users to ≈50–51% female, 49–50% male.

Digital access trends:

• Households with a broadband subscription: ~83–87%; an additional ~7–10% are smartphone‑only.
• Aberdeen enjoys widespread cable and growing fiber; rural townships rely more on fixed wireless/DSL/satellite, creating an urban–rural speed and reliability gap.
• Mobile LTE/5G is strong in and around Aberdeen and along major corridors; coverage varies in outlying areas.

Notes: Estimates combine 2020 Census/ACS county demographics with national email and device-use rates to localize likely usage.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Brown County, South Dakota (focus on what differs from statewide patterns)

User estimates (best-available estimates using Census population and national ownership rates)

• Population baseline: roughly 38–40k residents, anchored by Aberdeen.
• Adult mobile users: 27–30k adults use a mobile phone (≈92–95% of adults).
• Adult smartphone users: 26–29k (≈85–90% of adults).
• Teens (12–17): ~2–3k smartphone users (≈85–95% penetration in that age band).
• Net result: about 28–32k residents in Brown County use a smartphone; 30–34k use some kind of mobile phone.

Demographic breakdown (and how it diverges from the state overall)

• Urban vs rural split
  • Brown County is more urban than many SD counties due to Aberdeen. That raises smartphone and 5G usage above the rural SD average, but still below Sioux Falls– and Rapid City–area levels.
  • In-town (Aberdeen) users report stronger indoor coverage and 5G availability; outer townships rely more on LTE and experience more dead zones and slower uplink speeds.
• Age
  • 18–29: near-universal smartphone adoption, boosted by Northern State University; heavier use of unlimited data plans and app-based communications than the SD average for this age group.
  • 30–64: high adoption, similar to statewide but with somewhat greater 5G usage because of better in-town coverage and retail plan availability.
  • 65+: adoption trending up into the 60–75% range; slightly higher digital engagement than rural SD peers due to proximity to healthcare portals and carrier retail in Aberdeen.
• Income and plan type
  • More mixed-income urban workforce than many SD counties. That shows up as a higher share of prepaid and budget plans in Aberdeen compared with statewide suburban areas, but lower than some high-poverty rural counties.
  • Home broadband availability in and around Aberdeen reduces “smartphone-only” reliance compared with many rural SD counties.
• Race/ethnicity and language
  • Lower Native American share than the SD average, so the state’s reservation-specific mobile access barriers are less dominant locally.
  • Aberdeen’s immigrant and refugee communities (e.g., Latin American and Asian groups) increase demand for multilingual support, international calling, and OTT messaging—usage patterns not as pronounced in many SD rural counties.

Digital infrastructure and market notes (local specifics)

• Carriers and retail presence
  • All three national carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon) have coverage; retail storefronts and authorized dealers are concentrated in Aberdeen. That boosts device turnover and 5G plan adoption versus rural counties without nearby retail.
• Coverage and technology
  • 5G is available from at least one national carrier within Aberdeen; low-band 5G and LTE blanket most populated corridors (US‑12, US‑281). Performance drops on the far edges of the county and inside metal buildings typical of ag and light industry.
  • mmWave is unlikely; mid-band 5G availability is largely an in-town phenomenon.
• Backhaul and fiber
  • Strong local fiber backhaul from regional providers (e.g., SDN Communications, Midco, James Valley Telecommunications co-op) into Aberdeen and along main corridors. Rural fiber builds by co-ops near the county line improve tower backhaul and help stabilize mobile performance compared with some other Northeast SD counties.
• Public safety and reliability
  • First responder LTE coverage (e.g., AT&T FirstNet) is established in the city and major corridors; in remote sections responders still lean on LMR/radio with mobile as a supplement.
• Noted weak spots
  • Parks/recreation areas northwest of Aberdeen (e.g., around Richmond Lake) and low-density farm areas can see patchy indoor coverage and slower uploads, especially during peak ag seasons.

Trends that differ from the South Dakota statewide picture

• Mid-tier urban profile: Brown County’s urban core (Aberdeen) makes its mobile adoption and 5G use measurably higher than many rural SD counties, but still below the Sioux Falls and Rapid City metros.
• Lower smartphone-only dependence than rural SD: Because Aberdeen households have better access to cable/fiber, the share of residents relying solely on a smartphone for home internet is lower than in many rural counties, even though it is similar to or slightly above the state average in the student and lower-income segments.
• Faster 5G uptake in-town: Proximity to carrier retail and university-driven demand nudges earlier adoption of 5G handsets and plans than the rural SD norm.
• Different equity focus: Brown County’s barriers skew more toward language, affordability, and device financing for immigrant/refugee households, whereas statewide digital equity narratives also emphasize reservation broadband and coverage gaps.

Notes on methods and uncertainty

• Estimates combine recent Census/ACS population structure with Pew Research smartphone ownership rates by age/urbanicity and typical rural-urban coverage patterns in SD. Exact user counts and tower maps vary by carrier; for programmatic decisions, check current FCC Broadband Maps, South Dakota ConnectSD maps, and carrier coverage tools for Brown County.

Below is a concise, best-available snapshot built from Brown County demographics (≈38K residents; Aberdeen is the population center) and scaled from recent Pew Research Center U.S. social media benchmarks plus rural/midwest patterns. Treat figures as estimates with a ±5–10 percentage-point margin.

Topline user stats

• Residents using the internet: ≈82–88% of residents
• Residents using social media: ≈70–78% of residents (≈26–30K people)
• Typical daily use: 1–2+ hours for most users; teens/young adults often higher

Most‑used platforms (share of residents 13+ who use monthly; estimates)

• YouTube: 70–80%
• Facebook: 60–68%
• Instagram: 35–45%
• TikTok: 30–40%
• Snapchat: 30–40%
• Pinterest: 25–35% (skews female)
• LinkedIn: 12–18% (professionals, education/healthcare)
• X/Twitter: 10–15% (sports, weather, news)
• Reddit: 10–15% (male/tech/gaming skew)
• Nextdoor: 5–10% (pockets in Aberdeen; limited rural coverage)
• Messaging used alongside social: FB Messenger 50–60%; Snapchat DM heavy among teens/20s; WhatsApp 8–12% (families, international ties)

Age patterns (penetration by age group)

• 13–17: 90–95%+ use at least one platform; heavy on Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube; IG rising; Facebook minimal except for school/teams
• 18–24: 90%+; Snapchat, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube; Facebook mainly for groups/marketplace
• 25–34: 85–90%; Instagram, Facebook, YouTube; TikTok sizable; Messenger common for coordination
• 35–54: 75–85%; Facebook and YouTube dominate; Instagram moderate; TikTok 30–40%
• 55–64: 65–75%; Facebook primary; YouTube for how‑to, news; some Pinterest
• 65+: 45–55%; Facebook and YouTube; limited use of others

Gender breakdown (directional)

• Overall social media user base: slightly female‑skewed (≈52–55% female)
• Platform skews: Pinterest, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok skew female; Reddit and X skew male; Facebook roughly even but slightly female; YouTube slightly male

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first usage: Facebook Groups are central for local news, school/athletics, church updates, buy/sell/trade, lost‑and‑found, events; Marketplace is a major driver of active use.
• Short‑form video growth: Facebook Reels, Instagram Reels, and TikTok see strong passive viewing; many local businesses cross‑post the same short videos across platforms.
• Messaging > posting: A large share are “lurkers.” Private sharing via FB Messenger/Snapchat outpaces public posting, especially for family logistics and hyperlocal info.
• Local commerce and jobs: High engagement with deals/coupons, giveaways, seasonal hiring, farm/ranch and outdoor gear, and service providers; click‑to‑call and event RSVPs perform well.
• Time‑of‑day peaks: Early morning (6–8 a.m.), lunch (11:30 a.m.–1 p.m.), and evenings (7–10 p.m.); Sunday engagement is strong for community content.
• Weather and sports are catalysts: Rapid spikes on severe weather days (YouTube, Facebook, X) and during NSU/HS sports; local news pages drive shares and comments.
• Trust dynamics: Users tend to trust posts from known local pages/groups more than national sources; political engagement exists but many avoid commenting publicly.

Notes on method

• Figures are inferred from Pew Research Center 2023–2024 U.S. platform usage, rural/Midwest deltas, and county demographics (ACS). County‑specific surveys are scarce; use ranges for planning and test locally with page insights and ad diagnostics.