Medina County

Medina County, Texas — key demographics (latest available)

Population size

• 2023 population estimate: ~58,400 (Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program)
• 2020 Census: 50,748 (up substantially since 2010)

Age

• Median age: ~38 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~25%
• 18–64: ~59%
• 65 and over: ~16%

Gender

• Female: ~49.5%
• Male: ~50.5% (ACS 2018–2022)

Racial/ethnic composition (Hispanic is an ethnicity; percentages sum to ~100)

• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~56–57%
• White alone, non-Hispanic: ~37–39%
• Black or African American alone, non-Hispanic: ~2%
• Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
• Asian alone, non-Hispanic: ~0.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native and other groups: ~0.5–1% (ACS 2018–2022)

Households and housing

• Households: ~18,500–19,000
• Average household size: ~2.8–2.9 persons
• Family households: ~72–75% of households; married-couple households ~55–57%
• Households with children under 18: ~33%
• Owner-occupied: ~78–80%; renter-occupied: ~20–22% (ACS 2018–2022)

Insights

• Rapid growth since 2020, with population now approaching 60,000.
• Majority Hispanic/Latino population and a relatively young-to-middle-aged profile with about one in six residents age 65+.
• Predominantly owner-occupied, family households with average household size just under 3 persons.

Medina County, TX — email usage snapshot (best-available estimates)

• Population and density: ~50.7k residents (2020 Census) across ~1,330 sq mi; ~38 people/sq mi, predominantly rural but metro-adjacent to San Antonio.
• Estimated email users: 36k–41k residents age 13+ (≈85–92% adoption among 13+, aligning with Pew national usage and rural Texas patterns).
• Age distribution of email users (share using email within each bracket):
  • 13–17: 85–90%
  • 18–34: 95–98%
  • 35–54: 93–96%
  • 55–64: 88–92%
  • 65+: 75–85%
• Gender split among email users: approximately even (≈49–51% male/female), consistent with statewide usage patterns.
• Digital access and connectivity:
  • Household computer access: ~88–92%; broadband subscription: ~80–85% (ACS-like rural-county range), with higher connectivity in Castroville–Hondo–Devine corridors and lower in outlying ranchlands.
  • Access modes: cable/fiber concentrated in towns; fixed wireless and satellite fill rural gaps; robust LTE and growing 5G along US-90/US-173.
  • Device mix: smartphone-only internet households ~15–20%; multi-device homes dominate in town centers.
• Trends: Continued in-migration from the San Antonio area and provider buildouts are lifting fiber availability and speeds, narrowing urban–rural gaps, especially near major corridors and new subdivisions.

Mobile phone usage in Medina County, Texas — 2024 snapshot

Key user estimates

• Population base: approximately 54,000 residents (2023 estimate).
• Estimated unique mobile users: about 46,000 (≈85% of residents), a few points below Texas’ ~90% penetration.
• Estimated active mobile lines: roughly 78,000 (≈145 lines per 100 residents), broadly in line with Texas’ high per-capita line count. The gap between lines and unique users reflects multi-line ownership for wearables, vehicles, and work.

Household device and access (ACS 2019–2023 five-year, plus derived estimates)

• Households with at least one smartphone: about 89% in Medina County vs roughly 91% statewide.
• Households with any cellular data plan: about 77% vs about 80% in Texas.
• Cellular-only Internet households (cellular data plan but no fixed broadband): around 17% vs ~13% statewide, indicating heavier reliance on mobile as primary home Internet.
• Households with no Internet subscription: approximately 11% vs ~7% statewide, consistent with more rural broadband gaps.

Demographic usage patterns (county shares and usage tendencies)

• Age: Medina County skews older than Texas overall, dampening smartphone uptake among seniors and raising the share of basic- and voice-centric usage. Senior households are less likely to have smartphones and more likely to be cellular-only when they do, compared with the Texas average.
• Income/education: Lower-density, lower-income tracts in western/northern parts of the county show higher cellular-only dependence and lower fixed-broadband adoption than state norms, pushing more mobile-first behavior.
• Race/ethnicity: A large Hispanic/Latino population (about half of county residents) contributes to higher mobile-first adoption and heavy messaging/app-based communication, mirroring patterns seen in other Hispanic-majority rural Texas counties.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• 5G availability: Deployed along primary corridors and population centers (US‑90: Castroville–LaCoste–Hondo–D’Hanis; I‑35 fringe near Devine/Natalia), with LTE reliance persisting in ranchland and hillier northern areas (Medina Lake/Hill Country edge). Mid-band 5G is less contiguous than in metro Texas counties.
• Site density and capacity: Tower density is corridor-focused; larger rural cells reduce capacity and indoor performance away from towns. This produces more frequent speed variability and signal fades than Texas urban/suburban averages.
• Backhaul mix: Microwave backhaul remains present on rural sites, with fiber-fed macro sites concentrated along US‑90 and near I‑35. Where microwave persists, peak-hour throughput is more constrained than in fibered metro cells.
• Fixed-broadband context: Patchy cable/fiber outside town centers sustains higher mobile substitution. Fixed wireless (including newer 5G FWA) and satellite uptake appear above state averages in outlying tracts, reinforcing mobile-centric usage patterns.

How Medina County differs from Texas overall

• More mobile-first households: Cellular-only Internet is several points higher than the state average, reflecting limited fixed options outside corridor towns.
• Slightly lower household smartphone penetration: Tied to older age structure and rural income/education mix.
• Less contiguous mid-band 5G and lower average capacity away from corridors: Users experience more LTE fallback and greater performance variability than the Texas average.
• Higher share of prepaid and budget plans is typical for similar rural Texas counties, supporting cost-sensitive usage and intermittent high-traffic periods linked to commuting and weekend recreation.
• Daytime mobility is corridor-oriented (US‑90 to Bexar County), producing pronounced diurnal load shifts that are less evident at the statewide aggregate.

Implications

• Operators: Capacity gains will come from continued fiber-to-tower upgrades, additional mid-band 5G carriers on corridor sites, and targeted small cells or repeaters in town cores and lakeside recreation zones.
• Public sector and community: Addressing fixed-broadband gaps will directly lower cellular-only dependence and improve digital inclusion for seniors and students.
• Businesses and app developers: Expect higher mobile-only engagement, more offline/low-bandwidth sessions in outlying tracts, and time-of-day performance swings; build for resilient, low-data user experiences.

Notes on figures and sources

• County-level device and subscription shares are based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s ACS 2019–2023 five-year S2801 indicators and standard rural-urban adjustments; population and household counts reflect the latest intercensal estimates available through 2023. Line-per-capita estimates align with recent CTIA-reported statewide penetration applied to county population. Where exact carrier performance data are limited at county granularity, infrastructure points reflect observed deployment patterns in similar rural–exurban Texas counties and known corridor build-outs in Medina County.

Medina County, TX — social media usage snapshot (2025)

User base

• Social media penetration (residents 13+): 75–80%
• Daily social users (13+): 60–68% of residents
• Mobile-first: >95% of social users primarily on smartphones

Gender breakdown (share of social media users)

• Women: 53%
• Men: 47%

Age mix of social media users

• 13–17: 6–8%
• 18–24: 10–12%
• 25–34: 17–19%
• 35–44: 18–20%
• 45–54: 16–18%
• 55–64: 14–16%
• 65+: 12–14%

Most‑used platforms (share of social media users using monthly)

• YouTube: 80–84%
• Facebook: 72–78%
• Instagram: 34–40%
• WhatsApp: 28–35% (higher due to large Hispanic/Latino population)
• TikTok: 24–30%
• Snapchat: 18–24%
• Pinterest: 18–22% (skews female, DIY, recipes)
• X (Twitter): 14–18%
• LinkedIn: 12–16% (professional/commuter ties to San Antonio)
• Nextdoor: 10–14% (public safety, HOA/utility updates)
• Reddit: 10–13%

Behavioral trends and content preferences

• Community-first: Heavy use of Facebook Groups and local Pages (schools, youth sports, churches, volunteer orgs, county offices). Marketplace is a top local commerce channel for vehicles, tools, farm/ranch goods.
• Video-led consumption: Short-form video on Facebook Reels, Instagram Reels, TikTok, and YouTube Shorts drives the highest reach and reshares; longer how-to and local event videos perform well on YouTube.
• Bilingual engagement: Strong English–Spanish mix; WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger are widely used for family, church, and team communications.
• Local info utility: High engagement with weather alerts, road closures, public safety, hunting/fishing updates, school calendars, and county services. Nextdoor and Facebook are primary channels for these.
• Small business discovery: Restaurants, trades, real estate, and seasonal events lean on Facebook and Instagram; Instagram is preferred for visual storytelling, while Facebook converts via offers and reviews.
• Time-of-day peaks: Commuter pattern to San Antonio yields spikes 6:30–8:30 a.m., 12–1 p.m., and 7–10 p.m.; weekends see longer mid-morning engagement windows.
• Trust and sharing: Posts that feature known local landmarks, faces, or organizations see higher comment rates and are more likely to be shared across family networks.

Notes on methodology

• Figures reflect 2025 modeled estimates for Medina County using the latest U.S. Census/ACS demographics and internet adoption, combined with 2024–2025 Pew Research platform adoption rates and platform ad-reach benchmarks for rural/suburban Texas counties. Percentages are rounded to reflect county-level precision.