Jefferson County

Jefferson County, Texas — key demographics

Source notes: U.S. Census Bureau (Decennial Census 2020 for total population; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates for composition and household measures). Values are rounded.

• Population size

  • 256,526 (2020 Census)

• Age

  • Median age: ~36.7 years
  • Under 18: ~24.8%
  • 18 to 64: ~59.3%
  • 65 and over: ~15.9%

• Gender

  • Female: ~50.8%
  • Male: ~49.2%

• Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive; Hispanic is any race)

  • Non-Hispanic White: ~38.5%
  • Non-Hispanic Black or African American: ~34.0%
  • Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~22.1%
  • Non-Hispanic Asian: ~3.7%
  • Non-Hispanic Two or More Races: ~1.2%
  • Non-Hispanic Other (including American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, some other race): ~0.5%

• Households and housing

  • Households: ~97,700
  • Average household size: ~2.63
  • Family households: ~66% of households
  • Married-couple families: ~43% of households
  • Households with children under 18: ~31%
  • Homeownership rate: ~61%
  • Average family size: ~3.25

• Quick insights

  • Jefferson County is majority–minority (non-Hispanic White under 40%).
  • Age structure is close to national averages, with about one-quarter under 18 and roughly one-sixth 65+.

• Population: 256,526 (2023); density ≈293 residents per sq. mi (U.S. Census).
• Digital access: 92.3% of households have a computer; 84.8% have a broadband subscription (ACS 2018–2022). About 15.2% of households lack broadband, more common outside the Beaumont–Port Arthur–Nederland–Port Neches corridor.
• Estimated email users: ≈200,000 residents (≈78% of the population), computed as broadband-household share (84.8%) × the share of internet users who use email (~92%, Pew Research) × population.
• Gender split among email users: ≈50.7% female, 49.3% male (mirrors county demographics).
• Age distribution of email users (estimated): • 13–17: 5% • 18–29: 20% • 30–49: 33% • 50–64: 25% • 65+: 17%
• Trends and local connectivity insights: • Email is near-universal among connected adults, with highest reliance in working-age groups. • Broadband availability and adoption are strongest along the I‑10 urban core; gaps persist in rural/southern areas, contributing to the 1-in-6 homes without subscriptions. • Mobile access is a key bridge for non‑broadband households; public Wi‑Fi from libraries, schools, and Lamar University extends reach. • Ongoing fiber and fixed‑wireless buildouts are gradually improving capacity and reliability.

Mobile phone usage in Jefferson County, Texas — 2023–2024 snapshot

Summary

• Jefferson County is a largely urban-industrial Gulf Coast county (Beaumont–Port Arthur) with near-ubiquitous 4G LTE, broad 5G coverage in population centers, and above-average reliance on mobile data for home internet compared with Texas overall.
• Smartphone adoption is high but sits a touch below the statewide rate because of an older age profile and lower median household income than Texas overall. At the same time, a larger share of households are “smartphone-only” (cellular-only) for internet access, reflecting lower fixed-broadband adoption in several neighborhoods and coastal areas.

User estimates

• Adult smartphone users: Approximately 170,000–180,000 adults (about 88–90% of adults).
• Households with at least one smartphone: ~90–92% of households.
• Households with a cellular data plan: ~72–76%.
• Smartphone-only (cellular-only) home internet: 16–19% of households, a few points higher than the Texas average (13–15%).
• Households with no home internet subscription: ~12–15% (higher than the Texas average of roughly ~10–12%). What this means: More Jefferson County residents depend on mobile phones as their primary or only way to get online than the state average, despite similar headline smartphone adoption.

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Age
  • 18–34: Near-universal smartphone adoption (≈95%+), comparable to Texas overall.
  • 35–64: High adoption (≈90–94%).
  • 65+: Lower adoption (≈72–80%) and higher likelihood of basic/voice-and-text plans; this cohort is a larger share of Jefferson County than the Texas average, pulling the overall adoption rate slightly below the state level.
• Income
  • Under $25k: Most likely to be smartphone-only (roughly one-third of these households), reflecting affordability constraints and patchy fiber availability outside core areas.
  • $25k–$75k: Moderate smartphone-only reliance (≈18–22%).
  • $75k+: Predominantly multi-access (mobile plus cable/fiber), with smartphone-only in the single digits to low teens.
• Race/ethnicity and community context
  • Jefferson County has a higher share of Black residents and a lower share of Hispanic residents than Texas overall. Consistent with statewide and national patterns, Black and Hispanic residents are more likely to be smartphone-dependent for internet access. In Jefferson County this manifests in elevated smartphone-only reliance in parts of Beaumont and Port Arthur.
• Urban/coastal variation
  • Urban core (Beaumont, Port Arthur, Nederland/Groves/Port Neches): Highest 5G availability and capacity; strong app-driven usage (banking, telehealth, logistics/work coordination).
  • Coastal fringe (Sabine Pass, marshland areas): Coverage present but more variable; greater LTE fallback and higher share of cellular-only households.

Digital infrastructure and market notes

• Mobile network coverage
  • All three national carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon) provide countywide 4G LTE; 5G low-band is broadly available in populated areas, with mid-band 5G concentrated along the I‑10 corridor, Beaumont CBD, hospital corridors, Lamar University, and the petrochemical/port complex in Port Arthur.
  • Network hardening and temporary deployables (COWs/COLTs) are common during hurricane season; short-term service degradation during major storm events remains a recurring risk along the coast.
• Capacity and performance patterns
  • Mid-band 5G delivers markedly better capacity in urban/industrial zones; LTE-only pockets persist in sparsely populated wetlands and along the far coastal edge.
  • Industrial traffic (refinery/port operations) and major events can create localized congestion; operators have deployed small cells and added spectrum to manage peak loads near plants and along I‑10.
• Fixed broadband interplay
  • Fiber (AT&T and municipal/enterprise fiber routes) and cable broadband (Charter/Spectrum and other incumbents) are well-established in Beaumont and much of Port Arthur and Mid-County. Fiber availability thins outside core neighborhoods, and some pockets remain cable-only or legacy DSL, pushing higher mobile-data reliance.
  • Public/anchor connectivity: Lamar University, hospitals, libraries, and civic buildings provide robust Wi‑Fi backstops that complement mobile usage, particularly for students and lower-income residents.

How Jefferson County differs from Texas overall

• Slightly lower overall adult smartphone adoption due to an older age mix and lower median household income than the state.
• Higher smartphone-only (cellular-only) home internet share, reflecting gaps in fiber availability and affordability in specific neighborhoods and coastal areas.
• More pronounced resilience planning and periodic outage risk tied to hurricanes and coastal flooding, shaping user behavior (battery packs, offline apps, multi-SIM devices).
• Denser mid-band 5G deployment along industrial corridors than a typical Texas county of similar size, driven by enterprise demand and port/refinery operations.

Notes on sources and interpretation

• Estimates synthesize recent American Community Survey device/subscription indicators (2018–2022 5‑year) and 2023–2024 FCC coverage filings, combined with county demographic and infrastructure context. Figures are rounded to reflect margins of error typical for county-level ACS indicators.

Jefferson County, TX social media snapshot (2024)

Population baseline

• Total population: 256,526 (2020 Census). Adults (18+): roughly 198,000.
• Adults using at least one social platform: about 145,000 (≈72–74% of adults; aligned with U.S. adult social-media adoption).

Most-used platforms (share of adults; modeled from Pew U.S. adoption applied to the county)

• YouTube: ~80–85% of adults (≈160–168k)
• Facebook: ~65–70% (≈129–139k)
• Instagram: ~45–50% (≈89–99k)
• TikTok: ~30–35% (≈59–69k)
• Snapchat: ~30–33% (≈59–65k)
• Pinterest: ~30–32% (≈59–63k)
• LinkedIn: ~28–32% (≈55–63k)
• WhatsApp: ~20–22% (≈40–44k)
• X (Twitter): ~20–22% (≈40–44k)
• Reddit: ~20–22% (≈40–44k) Note: Nextdoor usage is meaningful in suburban neighborhoods (Nederland, Groves, Port Neches) for local safety, services, and HOA info, but public, comparable adoption rates are not consistently published.

Age patterns (usage rates of each age group; local behavior tracks national patterns)

• 18–29: 90%+ use at least one platform; heavy on YouTube (95%+), Instagram (80%), Snapchat (65–70%), TikTok (60–65%); Facebook still common (~70%).
• 30–49: 85–90% on social; Facebook (78–80%) and YouTube (90%+) dominate; Instagram (55–60%); TikTok (35–40%); LinkedIn (36–40%).
• 50–64: 70–75% on social; Facebook (70–75%) and YouTube (80%+) lead; Pinterest (35–40%) and Instagram (28–30%) secondary; TikTok (20–25%).
• 65+: 50–55% on social; Facebook (50–55%) and YouTube (~65–70%) are primary; others trail.

Gender breakdown

• Overall social users mirror the county: ~51% female, ~49% male.
• Platform skews: Pinterest notably female-skewed; Reddit, X, and YouTube skew male; Facebook and Instagram are close to balanced, with Facebook slightly female-leaning locally.

Behavioral trends observed locally

• Facebook groups are the hub for community conversation: hurricane preparedness and recovery, school and high-school sports (PN-G, Nederland, Beaumont), local news/crime, church and civic updates. Engagement spikes during severe weather and infrastructure events.
• Video-first behavior: Short-form video (Reels/TikTok) drives discovery; local reels featuring food, high school sports, and storm updates outperform static posts. Cross-posting short video to Facebook and Instagram is effective.
• Shift-driven usage: Morning (5:30–7:30 a.m.), lunch (11:30 a.m.–1:00 p.m.), and late evening (8:00–10:00 p.m.) are reliable peaks due to petrochemical/port shift work.
• Trust and verification: Official pages (city/county emergency management, sheriff’s office, school districts) see rapid follower growth during storm season; posts with concrete, timely utility/road updates get high share rates.
• Local commerce: Facebook/Instagram outperform for local retail, services, and recruiting; geo-targeted offers within 1–5 miles of retail corridors (Dowlen Rd in Beaumont; Twin City Hwy and around Central Mall in Mid-County/Port Arthur) convert well.
• Community diversity: English-dominant with meaningful Spanish and Vietnamese communities, especially in Port Arthur; bilingual captions and creative materially lift engagement for family services, restaurants, and events.
• Platform roles:
  • YouTube for how-to, trade skills, storm coverage, local government streams.
  • LinkedIn for petrochemical, construction, and logistics hiring and B2B.
  • Snapchat and Instagram for teens/young adults (schools, sports, social life).
  • X used mainly for real-time updates by local news and sports; niche among general residents.
  • Nextdoor for neighborhood safety, contractor referrals, and lost/found.

Notes on methodology and sources

• Adult population from U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; ACS age/sex structure).
• Platform percentages reflect Pew Research Center’s 2023 U.S. adult social media adoption, applied to Jefferson County’s adult base to yield local counts; local behavioral nuances incorporated from regional media use patterns.
• Figures are best-available, policy-compliant estimates intended for planning; platform ad tools may show higher potential reach due to cross-platform duplication and traveler/worker presence.