Bedford County

Here are key demographics for Bedford County, Tennessee (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates; values rounded):

• Population: ~53,000
• Age:
  • Median age: ~37
  • Under 18: ~25%
  • 65 and over: ~14%
• Sex:
  • Male: ~50%
  • Female: ~50%
• Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive; Hispanic can be any race):
  • Non-Hispanic White: ~63%
  • Hispanic/Latino: ~22–24%
  • Black/African American (non-Hispanic): ~8%
  • Two or more races (non-Hispanic): ~5%
  • Asian (non-Hispanic): ~1%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native, NHPI, other (non-Hispanic): ~1–2%
• Households:
  • Number of households: ~19,000
  • Average household size: ~2.8–2.9
  • Family households: ~70–75% of households
  • Average family size: ~3.3

Note: Bedford County is below the ACS 1-year population threshold; the 2019–2023 5-year estimates are the most current county-level source.

Bedford County, TN snapshot (estimates)

• Population: ~51–52K (2023). Email users: ~33–38K residents (primarily age 13+), based on national internet/email adoption rates applied to local age mix.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–17: ~5–7%
  • 18–34: ~25–30%
  • 35–54: ~33–37%
  • 55–64: ~13–16%
  • 65+: ~16–20%
• Gender split among users: roughly Female 51% / Male 49% (mirrors county population; email usage is near-parity by gender).

Digital access trends

• Broadband subscription: 80–85% of households have a home broadband subscription (ACS-like levels for similar TN counties); a meaningful minority are smartphone‑only (12–18%).
• Connectivity quality: Fixed 100/20 Mbps availability is widespread but not universal (roughly 70–85% of locations), with gaps in more rural tracts; fiber footprint has expanded since 2020 but remains uneven.
• Affordability: The lapse of the ACP in 2024 increased risk of disconnections among low‑income households.

Local density/connectivity facts

• Population density ≈100 people per sq. mile; users cluster around Shelbyville, with sparser, harder‑to‑serve areas in outlying rural zones that face last‑mile challenges.

Notes: Figures are modeled from U.S. Census/ACS, FCC availability, and Pew email adoption benchmarks.

Below is a concise, planning-oriented snapshot of mobile phone usage in Bedford County, Tennessee, with emphasis on how it differs from statewide patterns. Figures are best-available estimates derived from public datasets (ACS population/households, Pew mobile adoption, FCC coverage filings) and rural market benchmarks; use them as directional guides rather than exact counts.

At-a-glance context

• Population and households: roughly 50–55k residents and 18–20k households, centered on Shelbyville, with significant rural areas.
• Adult base: about 38–42k adults.
• Carriers present: AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile; MVNOs ride these networks. Public-safety uses AT&T FirstNet; Verizon Frontline also present.

User estimates (mobile adoption and reliance)

• Smartphone users: about 32–38k adults (roughly 85–90% smartphone adoption among adults; a bit below large-metro Tennessee).
• Total mobile lines (phones plus tablets/hotspots/IoT): on the order of 60–70k active SIMs, given ~1.2–1.3 lines per resident in mixed rural regions.
• Mobile-data–primary households: approximately 12–18% of households rely mainly on mobile data or hotspots for home internet (higher than the statewide average, reflecting patchy fixed broadband in rural tracts).
• Wireless-only voice households: majority of adults live in wireless-only households, broadly consistent with Tennessee’s high cellular-only trend, but Bedford skews slightly higher in rural blocks.

Demographic patterns that shape usage

• Age:
  • 18–44: near-universal smartphone ownership (~95%+), heavy app/social/video use; hotspot use common for renters.
  • 45–64: high adoption (~85–90%), with more work-related reliability needs (AT&T/Verizon bias).
  • 65+: materially lower ownership than state metros (~65–75%); larger feature-phone/entry Android segment; need larger fonts and simpler plans.
• Income and plan type:
  • Lower median income than Tennessee overall → higher prepaid/MVNO share and price sensitivity.
  • ACP sunset has increased churn, downgrades to lower-cost plans, and more multi-line family prepaid plans.
• Language/ethnicity:
  • A sizable Hispanic/Latino community means above-average use of WhatsApp, Facebook, and Spanish-language customer support; family remittance and international calling features see relatively higher demand.
• Device mix:
  • Android share is likely higher than the statewide average; more entry- to mid-tier devices in circulation. Testing apps/services on lower-spec Android is important.

Digital infrastructure highlights (what’s different locally)

• Coverage pattern:
  • Good macro coverage in and around Shelbyville and along main corridors; more dead zones and weak indoor signal in outer rural areas (terrain, distance, metal-roof buildings).
  • 5G low-band is widespread; mid-band (C-band/n77) is present near population centers but thins quickly outside town, so many users fall back to LTE in rural areas. This gap versus the state’s big metros is the primary performance difference.
• Capacity and events:
  • Noticeable congestion during large local events (e.g., fairs/celebrations) because small-cell density is limited compared with metro Tennessee; temporary COLTs/COWs may be needed to maintain throughput.
• Backhaul:
  • Where fiber backhaul to towers is limited, peak-hour speeds degrade more than in urban Tennessee. New fiber builds are improving this but coverage remains uneven.
• Fixed broadband interplay:
  • Shelbyville and some neighborhoods have cable or fiber; many rural tracts still rely on DSL, fixed wireless, mobile hotspots, or satellite.
  • Electric/fiber co-ops and regional ISPs are expanding fiber with state/federal funds, but until builds complete, mobile and FWA fill gaps. As a result, Bedford shows higher uptake of T-Mobile/Verizon 5G Home Internet than Tennessee metros with widespread cable.
• Public safety and enterprise:
  • AT&T FirstNet adoption among public safety is a local driver of AT&T market share; many contractors and logistics users also keep Verizon for perceived rural reliability.

How Bedford County differs from Tennessee overall (key trends)

• Higher reliance on mobile data for home internet due to patchy rural fiber/cable; FWA adoption above the state’s metro average.
• More prepaid/MVNO penetration and price-sensitive plan switching, especially post-ACP; statewide urban markets skew more postpaid.
• Device and app profile skews toward Android and bandwidth-light use cases; optimize for lower-spec devices and variable throughput.
• Greater day-to-day variability in speeds from LTE fallback and limited mid-band 5G outside town centers; Tennessee metros see steadier mid-band 5G.
• Stronger need for Spanish-language support and WhatsApp-centric engagement than many Tennessee counties.
• Event-driven congestion is more acute given fewer small cells and constrained backhaul; metros have denser capacity layers.

Implications for service, outreach, and planning

• Network: Prioritize mid-band 5G expansion just outside Shelbyville and along commuter corridors; add small cells or temporary capacity for major events; improve fiber backhaul to existing macros.
• Product: Offer robust prepaid family bundles, hotspot add-ons, and Spanish-language support; ensure plans accommodate intermittent FWA coverage checks.
• App/digital services: Design for offline-first and adaptive bitrate; test on entry-level Android; provide clear low-bandwidth modes.
• Community: Partner with local schools and employers for digital literacy and device upgrade programs, especially targeting seniors and Spanish-speaking households.

Notes on sources and methodology

• Population/households based on recent ACS/County estimates; smartphone adoption benchmarks from Pew Research; infrastructure patterns from FCC/NTIA filings and rural deployment norms in Middle Tennessee. County-specific figures are presented as ranges to reflect local variability and the lack of a single authoritative county-level mobile usage dataset.

Below is a concise, county‑level snapshot built from Bedford County’s population profile and recent US/Pew platform adoption trends, adjusted for rural-South patterns. Figures are modeled estimates (not platform-reported), shown as ranges to reflect uncertainty.

Population and user base

• Population: ~52,000
• Residents age 13+: ~44,000
• Social media users (13+): 36,000–39,000 (≈82–88% penetration)

Age mix of social media users (share of users)

• 13–17: 7–9%
• 18–24: 10–12%
• 25–34: 17–20%
• 35–44: 18–20%
• 45–54: 15–17%
• 55–64: 13–15%
• 65+: 12–14%

Gender breakdown (share of users)

• Female: 52–55%
• Male: 45–48%

Most‑used platforms in Bedford County (share of 13+ using monthly; approx users)

• YouTube: 78–85% (≈34k)
• Facebook: 68–75% (≈28–33k)
• Instagram: 35–42% (≈15–17k)
• TikTok: 32–38% (≈13–15k)
• Snapchat: 24–30% (≈9–11k)
• Pinterest: 28–34% (≈11–13k; skew female 25–44)
• WhatsApp: 15–22% (≈6–9k; higher among Hispanic residents)
• X/Twitter: 14–18% (≈5–7k)
• LinkedIn: 15–20% (≈6–8k; concentrated in education/healthcare/manufacturing mgmt)
• Reddit: 10–13% (≈4–5k)
• Nextdoor: 8–12% (≈3–4k; mainly Shelbyville addresses)

Behavioral trends to know

• Facebook is the community hub: local news, schools and high‑school sports, churches, civic groups, buy/sell/trade and Marketplace. Strong evening and weekend engagement.
• Video first: YouTube drives how‑to, farming/auto repair, home projects; Connected TV viewing is rising. Short‑form video (Reels/TikTok) performs across younger demos.
• Youth split: Teens/young adults use Snapchat for messaging/social circles and TikTok/IG Reels for entertainment and trends; heavy cross‑posting between IG and FB.
• Shopping behavior: Local boutiques and restaurants convert via Facebook/IG posts, Reels, and Stories; Pinterest influences home decor, weddings, recipes.
• Language and community: Spanish‑language content performs well; WhatsApp and Facebook facilitate family, work, and community groups.
• Events and alerts: County fairs, school events, and sports gain reach via FB Events; weather/closure updates spread quickly on FB and X/Twitter via local pages.
• Timing: Best posting windows tend to be weeknights 7–10 pm and weekend mornings; early‑morning scrolls show up among farm and shift‑work audiences.

Notes

• Estimates combine ACS county demographics with recent Pew Research on US platform adoption, adjusted for rural/Southern usage skews. For campaign planning, validate with page insights, platform ad‑tools audience sizes, and local group metrics.