Nacogdoches County

Key demographics – Nacogdoches County, Texas

Population

• Total population: 65,200 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 Population Estimates; 2020 Census: 64,653)

Age

• Median age: ~30.3 years (ACS 2019–2023 5-year)
• Age distribution: Under 18: ~22.6%; 18–24: ~22.4%; 25–44: ~24.2%; 45–64: ~18.4%; 65+: ~12.5% (ACS 2019–2023)

Gender

• Female: ~50.6%; Male: ~49.4% (ACS 2019–2023)

Race and ethnicity

• White alone: ~63%
• Black or African American alone: ~20.5%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1.0%
• Asian alone: ~1.6%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander alone: ~0.1%
• Some other race alone: ~7.0%
• Two or more races: ~6.8%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~19.3%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~51.7% (ACS 2019–2023; note: “Hispanic or Latino” is an ethnicity and overlaps with race)

Households and housing

• Number of households: ~24,400
• Average household size: ~2.54
• Family households: ~57% of households
• Tenure: Owner-occupied ~57%; renter-occupied ~43%
• Median household income: ~$50,400
• Persons in poverty: ~26% (ACS 2019–2023)

Key insights

• A large 18–24 cohort tied to Stephen F. Austin State University yields a younger median age and a higher renter share.
• Income levels trail state averages, and poverty rates are elevated, reflecting student presence and local economic mix.

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

Nacogdoches County, TX email usage (2025 estimates)

• Population ~65,000; adults (18+) ~50,700. Adult email users: ~47,100 (93% adoption).
• Age distribution of adult email users:
  • 18–24: ~11,350 (24%)
  • 25–44: ~15,600 (33%)
  • 45–64: ~11,960 (25%)
  • 65+: ~8,190 (17%)
• Gender split among email users mirrors county demographics: 51% women (24,300 users), 49% men (22,800 users).

Digital access and trends

• Household broadband subscription (any type): ~82%; computer ownership: ~90%; smartphone‑only home internet: ~9%; no home internet: ~11%.
• Email access is predominantly mobile among under‑45s, with desktop usage more common in 45+ cohorts; seniors show strong but comparatively lower adoption.
• Local density/connectivity: ~950 square miles and ~68 residents per square mile; the mix of a university hub and rural areas yields strong connectivity in and around the City of Nacogdoches, with pockets of weaker fixed‑line options in outlying areas where cellular data fills gaps.

Overall: Email is ubiquitous across working‑age adults and continues to grow among seniors, with mobile access shaping usage patterns.

Mobile phone usage in Nacogdoches County, TX: headline figures and how they differ from Texas overall

Scale of use and access (ACS 2018–2022 unless noted)

• Population and households: ≈65,700 residents (2023 estimate) in about 24,000 households.
• Households with a smartphone: ≈90% in Nacogdoches County vs ≈93% statewide.
• Households with any fixed broadband subscription (cable/DSL/fiber/satellite): ≈78% county vs ≈89% Texas.
• Households with a cellular data plan (for a smartphone/tablet): ≈67% county vs ≈77% Texas.
• Households with no internet subscription at home: ≈18% county vs ≈10% Texas.
• Smartphone-only households (rely on mobile data but have no fixed broadband): ≈18% in the county vs ≈12% statewide. That is about 4,200 of the county’s households.
• Estimated individual mobile users: about 50,000 residents use a mobile phone (combining adult and teen ownership rates with the local age profile).

How Nacogdoches County differs from the state

• More mobile-only reliance: The county’s smartphone-only share (≈18%) is roughly 1.5× the Texas average (≈12%), driven by a younger, renter, and lower-income mix in and around the city and by rural last-mile gaps outside it.
• Lower fixed broadband adoption: At ≈78%, fixed broadband take-up trails the state by ~11 percentage points, increasing dependence on cellular for both home and on-the-go connectivity.
• Slightly lower smartphone presence at the household level: ≈90% vs ≈93% statewide, consistent with a higher share of households without any internet subscription.
• Higher “no internet” rate: ≈18% of county households report no internet at home versus ≈10% across Texas, reflecting rural pockets and affordability constraints.

Demographic patterns that shape usage locally

• Younger skew boosts mobile intensity: The presence of Stephen F. Austin State University gives the county a younger adult share than Texas overall, which correlates with near-universal smartphone adoption among 18–29-year-olds and heavier app-based calling/messaging, video, and social media use on mobile.
• Income and housing: A larger share of lower-income and renting households than the state average aligns with higher smartphone-only reliance and greater use of prepaid or budget plans to control monthly costs.
• Urban–rural split: The city of Nacogdoches and corridors along US‑59/ future I‑69 see stronger 4G/5G performance and higher adoption, while rural tracts show more coverage variability and lower fixed-broadband availability—both factors that raise the utility of mobile service but can constrain speeds indoors.

Digital infrastructure notes

• Coverage: All three national carriers provide 4G LTE across the city and primary corridors; low-band 5G covers the city and major roads, with mid-band 5G focused in and immediately around Nacogdoches. Outside the city, service is predominantly LTE with spotty 5G, and signal quality can drop in wooded or sparsely populated areas.
• Capacity and speeds: In-town sites support modern spectrum (including low-band and mid-band 5G where deployed). Outside the core, fewer sites per square mile and more foliage limit capacity, so real-world speeds vary more than in Texas metros.
• Public safety and resilience: AT&T’s FirstNet band 14 is deployed across East Texas, improving priority coverage for first responders; residents near those sites also benefit from added low-band capacity.
• Alternatives and substitution: 5G fixed wireless access (e.g., from T‑Mobile/Verizon) is available in and around the city and is being adopted where cable/DSL is limited or costly. This, plus a higher smartphone-only rate, indicates mobile networks carry a larger share of home internet demand than is typical statewide.
• Wireline context (for comparison): Cable and some fiber exist in town, but rural last-mile choices remain limited, contributing to the county’s lower fixed-broadband subscription rate and higher reliance on cellular data.

What these numbers mean

• Expect roughly four to five thousand households to depend primarily on mobile data for home access, markedly above the state pattern.
• Planning for capacity on macro sites serving student housing, rental-dense neighborhoods, and along US‑59 will yield outsized benefits versus a typical Texas county.
• Addressing rural coverage/capacity and affordability (through more mid-band 5G build-out and subsidy enrollment) would narrow the county’s gap with state broadband adoption and reduce the “no internet” share.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2018–2022 5-year estimates, Types of Computers and Internet Subscriptions; 2023 population estimates; carrier public coverage disclosures and regional FirstNet deployment information.

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

Population baseline

• Residents: ~65,000
• Adults (18+): ~51,000 (ACS 2023)

User stats

• Social media users (any platform, monthly): ~43,000 adults (≈84% of 18+)
• By age among social media users:
  • 18–29: ~13,900 (≈32%)
  • 30–49: ~14,100 (≈33%)
  • 50–64: ~8,700 (≈20%)
  • 65+: ~6,300 (≈15%)
• Gender among social media users:
  • Women: ~22,800 (≈53%)
  • Men: ~20,200 (≈47%)

Most-used platforms (adults, monthly; modeled to county age mix)

• YouTube: ~82% (≈41,800 users)
• Facebook: ~68% (≈34,700)
• Instagram: ~50% (≈25,500)
• TikTok: ~36% (≈18,400)
• Pinterest: ~35% (≈17,900)
• Snapchat: ~31% (≈15,800)
• LinkedIn: ~27% (≈13,800)
• WhatsApp: ~26% (≈13,300)
• X (Twitter): ~22% (≈11,200)
• Nextdoor: ~15% (≈7,700)

Age and gender patterns

• 18–29 skew: Higher-than-typical adoption and multi-platform use driven by Stephen F. Austin State University students; heavy Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube.
• 30–49: Broad, daily use of YouTube and Facebook; strong Instagram uptake; TikTok usage moderate.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube dominant; Instagram and Pinterest secondary.
• 65+: Facebook leads for community/news; YouTube for tutorials and services; limited Instagram/TikTok.
• Gender tendencies: Facebook and Pinterest lean female; Reddit/X lean male; Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat are near parity with a slight female tilt.

Behavioral trends (what people do and how to reach them)

• Community and commerce: Facebook Groups and Marketplace are central for local buy/sell, housing, service referrals, events, and church/booster clubs; recommendation-seeking posts drive strong comment activity.
• Campus-driven content cycles: Peaks around SFA academic calendar, sports (Lumberjacks), Greek life, and nightlife; highest late-evening activity Thu–Sat.
• Short-form video first: Reels/TikToks and Snapchat Stories outperform static posts among under-30; local hashtags (e.g., #Nacogdoches, #SFA) help discovery.
• News and alerts: Facebook pages of city, county, law enforcement, schools, and local media concentrate breaking updates, weather, and road conditions; share rates spike during storms and emergencies.
• Local services and retail: Facebook and YouTube drive discovery; clear offers, phone numbers, and map links boost response among 50+; video how‑tos and before/after content perform well for trades and healthcare.
• Bilingual and family networks: WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger matter for Hispanic households (notable share of county population), facilitating group communication and event coordination.
• Neighborhood chatter: Nextdoor usage is modest but useful inside city neighborhoods for safety, lost/found pets, and contractor recommendations.

Method notes and sources

• Figures are county‑level estimates derived by weighting Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption rates by the county’s adult age mix (U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2023). Counts rounded to the nearest hundred to reflect estimation precision. Sources: Pew Research Center (Social Media Use in 2024); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2023.