Mclennan County

McLennan County, Texas — key demographics (latest U.S. Census Bureau data)

Population

• Total: ~272,000 (2023 population estimate)
• 2020 Census: 260,579 (growth of roughly 4–5% since 2020)

Age

• Median age: ~34–35 years (ACS 2019–2023)
• Under 18: ~25%
• 18–64: ~59–60%
• 65 and over: ~16%

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

Racial/Ethnic composition

• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~32%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~53%
• Black or African American alone: ~15–16%
• Asian alone: ~2–3%
• American Indian and Alaska Native alone: ~1%
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone: ~0.1–0.2%
• Two or more races: ~4–6% (Note: Hispanic/Latino is an ethnicity and overlaps with race categories.)

Households and housing

• Households: ~102,000 (ACS 2019–2023)
• Persons per household: ~2.6–2.7
• Family households: ~63% of households; married-couple families: ~44%
• Households with children under 18: ~31%
• Nonfamily households: ~37% (living alone: ~29%)
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~58–59%

Insights

• The county is growing moderately post-2020 and has a relatively young age profile.
• Population is diverse: a little over half are non-Hispanic White, about one-third are Hispanic/Latino, and roughly one in six are Black.
• Household size is near the U.S. average, with homeownership slightly below the Texas average.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 Population Estimates; 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates.

McLennan County, TX snapshot (≈266,000 residents; ≈1,060 sq mi; ~250 people/sq mi)

Estimated email users: ≈193,000 residents (≈73% of the population; roughly 9 in 10 adults).

Age distribution of email users (share of users):

• 18–29: ~25%
• 30–49: ~37%
• 50–64: ~25%
• 65+: ~13%

Gender split among users: ~51% female, ~49% male (mirrors county population).

Digital access and trends:

• ~93% of households have a computer.
• ~87% of households have a broadband subscription.
• ~14% are smartphone‑only internet households, shaping shorter, app‑centric email behavior.
• Email use is heaviest among working‑age adults and college populations in Waco; seniors increasingly use email for healthcare, services, and community updates.

Local connectivity facts:

• Urban Waco along the I‑35 corridor has dense, multi‑provider coverage (fiber/cable with gigabit options), supporting high‑frequency email usage.
• Exurban and rural parts of the county rely more on fixed wireless or satellite, which correlates with lower attachment‑heavy or video‑rich email use.

Insight: Strong urban broadband and a relatively young population sustain high email adoption; remaining friction is concentrated in rural areas and among smartphone‑only users.

Mobile phone usage in McLennan County, Texas – 2025 snapshot

Headline user estimates (countywide)

• Population base: approximately 270,000 residents (2025 planning estimate; decennial Census 2020 counted 260,579).
• Mobile phone users (all types): ~233,000 individuals (est.).
• Smartphone users: ~220,000 individuals (est.), implying countywide smartphone penetration of roughly 81–83% of total population and ~92–95% of teens/adults.
• Mobile-only internet households (cellular data with no fixed broadband): ~17% of households (est.), higher than the Texas average by several points.
• Prepaid vs. postpaid: prepaid lines account for an estimated ~28% of active lines in the county, meaningfully above the Texas average, reflecting a sizable student market and price-sensitive segments.

How McLennan County differs from Texas overall

• Greater mobile-only reliance: A higher share of households depend on cellular data for home internet compared with the Texas average (driven by students, renters, and rural edges of the county).
• Higher prepaid mix: Prepaid usage is elevated versus the state, aligned with student/temporary residents and budget-oriented households.
• More pronounced urban–rural split: The Waco urban core has strong 5G capacity, but outlying communities show more coverage variability and greater dependence on mobile hotspots than typical statewide.
• Event-driven load spikes: Large campus and tourism events (Baylor, Downtown Waco/Magnolia) create sharper, localized evening/weekend congestion than is typical for similarly sized Texas markets.

Demographic breakdown of usage (estimates derived from county age structure, student share, income mix, and national adoption by age)

• Age
  • 13–17: ~95% smartphone adoption; heavy use of messaging/video and school apps; higher prepaid share than older cohorts.
  • 18–24 (large Baylor/student presence): ~98% smartphone adoption; very high reliance on unlimited plans, hotspots, and app-based payments; above-average mobile-only home internet.
  • 25–44: ~96% smartphone adoption; multi-line family plans; high use of 5G for work-from-home backup.
  • 45–64: ~90% smartphone adoption; rising use of mobile banking/telehealth; notable use of bundled carrier plans with entertainment perks.
  • 65+: ~75% smartphone adoption; feature-phone share persists but continues to decline; increased interest in simplified smartphones and telehealth support.
• Income and housing
  • Lower-income and renter households disproportionately rely on mobile data as the primary home connection; prepaid and MVNO plans over-index versus state averages.
  • Homeowners in the Waco core typically run postpaid multi-line plans and use mobile as a secondary connection behind fixed broadband.
• Language and inclusion
  • Spanish-speaking households participate strongly in prepaid and family-share offerings; community organizations and schools help bridge device and data gaps for students.

Digital infrastructure and coverage notes

• 5G coverage
  • Widespread 5G (including mid-band) along the I‑35 corridor through Waco, with strong indoor performance in most commercial corridors and on/around Baylor University.
  • Capacity-focused upgrades (small cells and additional mid-band carriers) are concentrated in Downtown Waco, Baylor campus areas, major retail nodes, and along I‑35 interchanges.
  • Rural edges (especially away from I‑35) rely more on low-band 5G/LTE; speeds and indoor penetration vary by terrain and distance to towers.
• Major mobile providers and MVNOs
  • Facilities-based: AT&T (including FirstNet public-safety network), T‑Mobile, Verizon all operate countywide; UScellular is not a primary facilities operator here.
  • Prepaid/MVNOs with strong local presence: Cricket (AT&T), Metro (T‑Mobile), Boost, Total by Verizon, Consumer Cellular, Visible, Google Fi, Straight Talk and other Tracfone brands.
• Backhaul and fixed-network context affecting mobile
  • Fiber in the Waco core from AT&T and other carriers improves 5G backhaul capacity; cable DOCSIS widely available (Charter/Spectrum).
  • Fixed wireless access (FWA) via 5G is available in much of the urban area and some suburbs; rural availability is patchier and more price/performance constrained.
  • Several WISPs serve outer-township areas; where fixed options are limited, households rely on phone-based hotspots, boosting mobile-only rates.
• Public and institutional connectivity
  • Baylor University and local school districts operate high-capacity Wi‑Fi; these networks offload significant student traffic from cellular during school hours.
  • Public safety runs on FirstNet (AT&T) with prioritized capacity; coverage enhancements around critical facilities benefit adjacent consumer service.

Usage implications and trends to watch

• Mobile is the primary on-ramp to the internet for a larger share of McLennan County residents than statewide, particularly students, renters, and rural households.
• The prepaid share—and churn—remain higher than the Texas average, so promotions and MVNO offerings have outsized impact on local market dynamics.
• Continued mid-band 5G sector splits and small-cell densification in Waco will ease event congestion; extending fiber backhaul and additional sites on the rural periphery will be key to narrowing the urban–rural performance gap.
• 5G fixed wireless is gaining traction as a “good enough” home internet alternative for renters and budget-conscious users, reinforcing the county’s above-average mobile-only profile.

Methodological note

• User counts and adoption rates are modeled from the 2020 Census population base, 2023–2025 county growth, nationally observed smartphone adoption by age, and local modifiers (student share, income, urban–rural mix). Figures marked “est.” are point estimates suitable for planning and will track finalized ACS releases within a few percentage points.

Social media usage in McLennan County, TX (2025 snapshot)

Baseline size and access

• Population: ≈268,000 (2023 ACS estimate); ≈77% are 18+
• Broadband access: ≈86–89% of households have a home broadband subscription
• Estimated social media users: ≈165,000 residents (≈148,000 adults + ≈17,000 teens 13–17), derived from Pew U.S. adoption rates applied to county demographics

Most-used platforms (adult reach; county usage closely tracks current U.S. adult benchmarks)

• YouTube: ≈83% of adults
• Facebook: ≈68%
• Instagram: ≈47%
• TikTok: ≈33%
• Snapchat: ≈30%
• Pinterest: ≈30% (heavier among women)
• LinkedIn: ≈31% (stronger among 25–44)
• X (Twitter): ≈22%
• Reddit: ≈22% (male-skew)
• Nextdoor: ≈20% (stronger in Waco neighborhoods)
• WhatsApp: ≈21% (notable among Hispanic households and transplants)

Age-group usage patterns (share of adults in each cohort using the platform; indicative based on latest U.S. patterns applied locally)

• Teens 13–17: YouTube ≈95%, Instagram ≈72%, Snapchat ≈65%, TikTok ≈62%, Facebook ≈30%
• 18–29: YouTube ≈95%, Instagram ≈78%, Snapchat ≈65%, TikTok ≈62%, Facebook ≈70%
• 30–49: YouTube ≈93%, Facebook ≈73%, Instagram ≈49%, TikTok ≈39%, LinkedIn ≈36%
• 50–64: Facebook ≈73%, YouTube ≈83%, Instagram ≈29%, TikTok ≈15%, Pinterest ≈40%
• 65+: Facebook ≈50–55%, YouTube ≈49–55%, Instagram ≈15–20%, Nextdoor ≈20–25%

Gender breakdown (platform usage skews)

• Women: More likely to use Facebook (+3–5 pts vs men), Instagram (+3–5), Pinterest (~44% women vs ~16% men), Nextdoor (+2–4)
• Men: Higher on YouTube (+3–5), Reddit (~28% men vs ~13% women), X/Twitter (+5–7), Discord (small but male-skewed)

Behavioral trends and local context

• Facebook Groups dominate community coordination: churches, schools/boosters, youth sports, neighborhood watch, city updates; Events used for festivals, Baylor athletics, and charity drives
• Short‑form video is the attention winner: TikTok and Instagram Reels drive discovery for food spots, music, college-life content, and local news explainers; creators cross‑post to YouTube Shorts
• Messaging over feeds: Snapchat (HS/college), Instagram DMs, and WhatsApp (notably in Hispanic households) are primary for day‑to‑day communication
• Local news and civic info flow through Facebook, YouTube, and X: TV stations (KWTX/KCEN), Waco Tribune-Herald, and City of Waco leverage livestreams and rapid alert posts
• Commerce is “Meta-first”: Small businesses rely on Facebook/Instagram for reach, Marketplace for resale, and boosted posts for geo‑targeting; LinkedIn used for healthcare, education, and manufacturing recruiting
• Time-of-day patterns: Engagement peaks evenings (7–10 pm) and weekends; school calendars, Baylor sports, and church schedules noticeably shape traffic spikes
• Language and culture: With a large Hispanic/Latino population (~28–30%), bilingual content performs well; WhatsApp/Facebook Groups support family, church, and event coordination
• Trust and community signals matter: User reviews, UGC, and local endorsements (pastors, coaches, Baylor-affiliated accounts) drive conversion more than polished ads

Key takeaways

• Reach Facebook and YouTube for countywide scale; use Instagram/TikTok for 13–34 discovery and culture; deploy Snapchat for high school/college messaging; Nextdoor for neighborhood credibility
• Prioritize short-form video, Groups, and Events; align posting with evening/weekend peaks and local calendars
• Use bilingual assets where relevant and lean into trusted local voices for amplification