Archer County

I can provide exact figures, but need to know your preferred source/year:

• ACS 2019–2023 5-year estimates (best for small counties; most detailed), or
• 2020 Decennial Census (official count; limited detail)

Which would you like? Also, do you want additional household details (e.g., family vs. nonfamily share, average household size), or just basics (households count, average size)?

Archer County, TX email usage (estimates)

• Population context: ~8.6K residents (2020); low density ~9 people/sq mi across ~900+ sq mi; largely rural.
• Estimated email users: 6.2K–6.7K (about 72–78% of residents). Based on rural Texas internet/email adoption rates and local age mix.
• Age distribution of email users:
  • 13–34: 32–38% (near-universal among teens/young adults).
  • 35–54: 28–32%.
  • 55+: 30–36% (lower adoption than younger cohorts but rising).
• Gender split: roughly even (about 50/50 male–female among users).
• Digital access trends:
  • Home broadband subscription around 70–75% of households; 15–20% are smartphone-only internet users.
  • Access is a mix of DSL/cable in town areas, fixed wireless in outlying zones; fiber is limited but slowly expanding.
  • Satellite (e.g., modern LEO options) fills gaps on ranchlands and sparsely populated roads.
  • 4G LTE is widespread; 5G mainly along major corridors and near population centers; performance drops in remote areas.
• Connectivity factors: Proximity to the Wichita Falls metro supports backhaul and provider presence, but long distances between homes keep per-mile infrastructure costs high, sustaining a rural digital divide.

Below is a practical, decision-ready snapshot of mobile phone usage in Archer County, Texas, with emphasis on ways it differs from statewide patterns. Figures are best-available estimates derived from recent Census/ACS Computer & Internet Use, FCC coverage filings, and carrier rollouts in similar rural Texas counties; use them as planning ranges rather than point-precise counts.

High-level picture

• Population context: Archer County has roughly 8.5–9.0k residents, about 6.6–7.0k adults.
• Estimated smartphone users: 5.1k–5.7k adults (roughly 76–82% adult adoption, a few points below the Texas average due to older age mix and rural coverage gaps).
• Household smartphone access: 2.8k–3.1k of ~3.2–3.4k households have at least one smartphone.
• Mobile-only internet dependence: 18–25% of internet-connected households rely primarily on a cellular data plan (hotspot or phone) for home access—higher than the Texas average (≈15–18%).

Demographic breakdown of usage

• Age (main driver):
  • 65+ share is notably higher than Texas overall. Smartphone adoption in this cohort likely trails the state by 8–12 points; basic/flip phones and shared family plans are more common.
  • Working-age adults (25–54) are near state adoption rates but show more carrier-driven choices (coverage first, price second) than brand- or feature-driven choices typical in metros.
• Race/ethnicity and language:
  • The county is predominantly non-Hispanic White, with a smaller Hispanic share than Texas overall. Spanish-first support demand is lower than state average, though schools and public services still need bilingual communication tools.
• Income/occupation patterns:
  • Mix of ranching, oilfield/energy services, education, and public sector. This skews device choices toward durability and coverage (rugged Androids, iPhone with cases, vehicle boosters) over cutting-edge features.
  • Upgrade cycles tend to be longer than in Texas metros; bring-your-own-device and multi-year device retention are common.
• Digital literacy:
  • Slightly greater need for in-person setup/support for older adults compared with state averages; local libraries, schools, and carriers fill support gaps.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Coverage tiers:
  • Town centers (Holliday, Archer City, Lakeside City) have strong 4G LTE and generally workable 5G from at least one major carrier.
  • Outlying ranchland has patchier 5G; LTE is the practical baseline. Expect dead zones in low-lying or heavily wooded areas and inside metal-roof structures without boosters.
• 5G profile:
  • Mid-band 5G (C-band/n41) is present near the Wichita Falls edge and along main corridors; it thins quickly outside towns. Ultra-high-band/mmWave is essentially absent.
  • Real-world 5G speeds are variable and frequently fall back to LTE during peak hours or at cell edges.
• Backhaul and capacity:
  • Fiber-fed sites cluster near highways and the Wichita Falls side; deeper rural sites often lean on microwave backhaul. This produces bigger town–country speed gaps than Texas overall.
• Carriers and redundancy:
  • AT&T and Verizon generally offer the most consistent rural coverage; T-Mobile is strong in/near Lakeside City and corridors but less reliable deeper into the county.
  • Two-carrier setups (e.g., family members split across carriers) and signal boosters are notably more common than in urban Texas.
• Fixed broadband interplay:
  • Cable/fiber is available near Lakeside City/Holliday; elsewhere, residents lean on DSL, fixed wireless ISPs, or satellite. That pushes higher-than-average reliance on phone hotspots/home LTE routers.

How Archer County differs from Texas overall

• Slightly lower smartphone adoption, driven by an older population and more coverage-limited areas.
• Higher mobile-only home internet reliance because wired options thin out outside the towns.
• Bigger performance gap between town cores and rural edges; LTE remains the anchor technology more often than in Texas metros.
• Slower, patchier 5G rollout; fewer mid-band sectors countywide and virtually no mmWave.
• More emphasis on coverage reliability, vehicle mounts, and boosters; fewer early adopters of premium devices.
• Longer device refresh cycles and more rugged/prosumer gear for outdoor work.
• Greater tendency for households and first responders to maintain multi-carrier redundancy.

Actionable takeaways

• Network planning: Prioritize mid-band 5G infill and fiber backhaul to rural towers; capacity upgrades at town-edge sectors will deliver outsized benefits.
• Retail/device strategy: Stock boosters, high-gain antennas, rugged cases, and battery packs; emphasize Wi-Fi Calling setup during onboarding for metal-roof homes.
• Public-sector programs: Senior-focused smartphone training and affordable hotspot programs will have above-average impact.
• Emergency communications: Strengthen cell-on-wheels agreements and cross-carrier interoperability; text alert systems are widely read and should remain a cornerstone.

Social media usage in Archer County, TX (short breakdown)

Baseline

• Population: ~8.5–9.0k residents; adults (18+) ~6.6–7.0k.
• Method note: County-level platform data aren’t published; figures below estimate likely local usage by applying 2024 Pew Research U.S. patterns (with rural adjustments) to the county’s adult population. Treat as directional ranges.

Overall adoption

• Adults using at least one social platform: ~65–75% (≈4.3k–5.1k adults).

Most‑used platforms among adults (estimated penetration)

• YouTube: 72–78% of adults
• Facebook: 65–70%
• Instagram: 32–40%
• TikTok: 22–28%
• Snapchat: 18–25% (concentrated under 30)
• Pinterest: 25–32% overall; 40–50% of adult women
• WhatsApp: 15–22%
• X (Twitter): 15–20%
• LinkedIn: 12–18% (skews to college‑educated, management/professional)
• Reddit: 12–18% (skews male, under 35)

Age group patterns (share using each platform, rough ranges)

• 18–29: 90%+ on at least one platform
  • Instagram 70–80%, TikTok 60–70%, Snapchat 60–70%, YouTube 90%+, Facebook ~45–55%
• 30–49: 80–85% on at least one
  • Facebook 70–80%, YouTube 85%+, Instagram 45–55%, TikTok 25–35%, Snapchat ~20–25%
• 50–64: 70–75% on at least one
  • Facebook 65–70%, YouTube ~70–80%, Instagram 25–35%, TikTok 15–22%
• 65+: 50–60% on at least one
  • Facebook 45–55%, YouTube 55–65%, other platforms in the teens or lower

Gender breakdown (tendencies)

• Women: Higher use of Facebook and Pinterest; slightly higher Instagram; active in buy/sell/trade, school, church, and community groups.
• Men: Higher YouTube, Reddit, X; strong interest in sports, outdoors, DIY/mechanical/ag content.
• Overall Facebook usage is fairly balanced by gender.

Behavioral trends locally (rural North Texas patterns)

• Community and commerce live on Facebook:
  • Heavy Facebook Groups activity (buy/sell/trade, school sports, churches, local gov/emergency updates).
  • Marketplace is a primary channel for local buying.
• Video is dominant:
  • YouTube for how‑to, equipment/auto repair, ag/ranching, hunting/fishing.
  • Short‑form video (Reels/TikTok) for local events, food spots, and entertainment; under‑35s post and share most.
• Messaging habits:
  • Facebook Messenger is the default for adults; Snapchat for teens/young adults; WhatsApp used within family/friend networks.
• Trust and creative preferences:
  • Local faces, plain‑spoken copy, and user‑generated photos/video outperform polished, “national” creative.
  • Recommendations from neighbors/community groups drive decisions (contractors, services, yard/stock/feed, vehicles).
• Timing and device:
  • Mobile‑first consumption; peak engagement evenings (7–10 pm) and weekends; lunchtime bump on weekdays.
• Platform roles:
  • Facebook = community + commerce; YouTube = education/entertainment; Instagram = local lifestyle/visual discovery; TikTok = younger audience reach and event virality; Pinterest = home/recipe/crafts (women); LinkedIn = niche professional networking; X/Reddit = small but vocal niches.

Notes and caveats

• Percentages are estimates based on Pew Research Center 2024 U.S. platform adoption (with modest rural adjustments) and ACS population structure; real local reach can vary by town (Archer City, Holliday, Windthorst) and by event/season.
• For planning, validate with platform ad‑tool reach estimates and local group membership counts.