Rains County

Rains County, Texas — key demographics (latest available, primarily ACS 2019–2023 5-year estimates; 2020 Census noted where relevant)

Population size

• Total population: ~13,100 (ACS 2019–2023); 12,164 (2020 Census)
• 2010–2020 growth: +11% (10,914 to 12,164); continued growth post-2020

Age

• Median age: ~46–47 years
• Age distribution: Under 18: ~21%; 18–24: ~6%; 25–44: ~22%; 45–64: ~28%; 65+: ~23%

Gender

• Female: ~50–51%
• Male: ~49–50%

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

• White, non-Hispanic: ~78%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~14%
• Black/African American: ~2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1%
• Asian: <1%
• Two or more races: ~4–5%
• Other: <1%

Household data

• Total households: ~5,100
• Average household size: ~2.5
• Family households: ~66%; nonfamily: ~34%
• Married-couple households: ~52% of all households
• Homeownership rate: ~78%
• Households with children under 18: ~26%

Notes and source

• Figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau: 2019–2023 American Community Survey (5-year) and 2020 Decennial Census (PL 94-171). Numbers rounded for clarity.

• Snapshot: Rains County, TX population 12,164 (2020 Census), largely rural (~50 people per sq mi). Connectivity is concentrated around Emory/Point; outlying areas rely more on fixed‑wireless/DSL with growing, but still limited, fiber.
• Estimated email users: ~8,600 residents use email regularly (≈70% of total; ≈88–92% of connected adults), consistent with rural-TX internet/email adoption.
• Age distribution of email users (est. share of users → count):
  • 13–17: 6% → ~520
  • 18–34: 22% → ~1,890
  • 35–54: 32% → ~2,750
  • 55–64: 17% → ~1,460
  • 65+: 23% → ~1,980
• Gender split among email users: 51% female (4,390) / 49% male (~4,210), mirroring the county’s older-leaning population.
• Digital access and trends:
  • ~75–80% of households have a broadband subscription (ACS-like rural benchmarks), with ~10–15% mobile-only internet.
  • Device access is high: ~90%+ of households have a smartphone or computer; multi-device households are most common in town centers.
  • 2022–2024 saw incremental fiber buildouts and improved fixed‑wireless capacity; 4G/5G coverage is strongest along US‑69 and TX‑19 corridors, weaker near lake edges and sparsely populated roads.
• Implications: Email reach is broad and skews slightly older; improvements in last‑mile and mid‑band 5G will expand reliability, but low density keeps some pockets latency‑ and speed‑constrained.

Rains County, Texas — mobile phone usage overview

Scope and sources

• Population anchor: 2020 Census count of 12,164 residents.
• Mobile adoption and dependence are not directly published at the county level; the user metrics below are modeled from nationally accepted adoption rates (Pew Research Center, National Health Interview Survey) adjusted for Rains County’s older age structure and rural profile, and cross-checked against American Community Survey device/connection patterns typical of rural East Texas counties of similar size. Figures are expressed as best-available point estimates with conservative ranges.

User estimates (adults and households)

• Adult smartphone users: 7,800–8,600 residents. Basis: adult population in a county of 12.2k, skewed older than Texas overall, with smartphone ownership rates about 3–6 percentage points lower than the Texas average; seniors’ adoption materially reduces the aggregate.
• Any mobile phone (cellphone) users: 9,500–10,400 residents. Basis: near-universal cellphone ownership among working-age adults, slightly lower among seniors; rural counties trail Texas by a small margin.
• Smartphone-dependent internet users (rely primarily on a smartphone for home internet): 1,400–1,900 residents. Basis: higher smartphone-only reliance than the Texas average in rural, lower-density areas with weaker fixed broadband options.
• Wireless-only households (no landline): 65–75% of households. Basis: Texas exceeds the national average for wireless-only; Rains’ older age mix pulls this slightly down, while rural cost considerations push it up—netting to about state-like levels.
• Households with at least one smartphone: 80–88% of households. Basis: household device presence is high even where fixed broadband subscriptions lag.

Demographic breakdown of mobile use

• Age: Seniors (65+) form a larger share of residents than Texas overall, depressing smartphone ownership and 5G device uptake relative to statewide figures; among seniors, basic voice/text and LTE-only devices are more common.
• Income/education: Median household income trails the Texas median, which correlates with higher prepaid usage, slower device replacement cycles, and a greater share of smartphone-only internet reliance where fixed broadband is expensive or unavailable.
• Race/ethnicity: A higher non-Hispanic White share and smaller Hispanic share than Texas overall. Usage differences by race/ethnicity are modest once income and age are controlled, but language-inclusive plans and family-plan penetration are somewhat lower than in urban Texas markets.

Digital infrastructure and market characteristics

• Coverage footprint: 4G LTE is effectively countywide along primary corridors (e.g., US-69) with localized weak spots in low-lying and lake-adjacent areas; indoor coverage quality varies in the most rural tracts. 5G is present but primarily along main routes and in/near Emory; mid-band capacity remains limited outside those nodes.
• Capacity and speeds: Typical rural Texas pattern—good outdoor LTE coverage, but capacity constraints at peak times and weaker indoor signal away from highways. 5G speeds are inconsistent where only low-band 5G is available; mid-band delivers strong performance where deployed.
• Carriers: Nationwide MNOs (AT&T including FirstNet, Verizon, T-Mobile) operate in the county; MVNOs piggyback on these networks. Fixed wireless (LTE/5G) is a meaningful alternative where wired broadband is sparse.
• Backhaul and towers: Sparse macro-tower grid compared with suburban Texas; microwave and fiber backhaul exist along the main transport routes. New macro or small-cell placements are focused on corridor capacity rather than deep rural in-fill.
• Emergency/priority services: FirstNet coverage follows AT&T’s rural build; public-safety grade coverage is stronger near municipal centers and primary roads.

How Rains County differs from Texas overall

• Adoption level: Smartphone ownership and 5G device penetration are a few points lower than the Texas average due to an older population and more price-sensitive users; basic LTE handset usage is stickier.
• Internet dependence: A larger share of residents rely primarily on smartphones for internet access than Texas as a whole, driven by patchier fixed broadband options; this elevates mobile data consumption per user even as overall adoption lags slightly.
• Network experience: Coverage is broad but thinner indoors away from corridors; 5G availability is more limited and variable than the Texas urban/suburban norm, with more frequent reversion to LTE during peak loads.
• Plan mix and spending: Higher prevalence of prepaid and budget MVNO plans, fewer premium multi-line and device-upgrade bundles than in metro Texas, and longer device replacement cycles.
• Growth trend: Usage growth is driven less by new adopters and more by migration from voice/SMS-centric use to data-centric use, plus rising smartphone-only reliance; statewide growth, by contrast, is more about capacity and 5G performance upgrades for an already-saturated base.

Implications

• For carriers: Greatest impact from targeted mid-band 5G and LTE sector capacity upgrades along US-69 and town centers, plus indoor coverage enhancements for community anchor sites.
• For public sector: Programs that expand affordable fixed broadband reduce smartphone-only dependence and improve equity; where fixed buildout lags, subsidized fixed wireless CPE can relieve mobile networks and improve home connectivity.
• For businesses and services: Design mobile experiences that are resilient on LTE, data-efficient, and offline-tolerant; expect above-average Android share and prepaid plans, influencing app size, update cadence, and payment options.

Rains County, TX social media snapshot (2025)

Overall usage (adults 18+)

• Adults using at least one social platform monthly: about 72% (±5 percentage points; rural-adjusted from recent Pew Research Center findings)
• Daily social users: about 60–65% of adults
• Multi-platform behavior: most social users maintain 3–4 active platforms; cross-posting between Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube is common

Most-used platforms among adults (monthly reach; rural-adjusted estimates)

• YouTube: ~82%
• Facebook: ~72%
• Instagram: ~38%
• TikTok: ~30%
• Pinterest: ~32%
• Snapchat: ~24%
• WhatsApp: ~24%
• X (Twitter): ~20%
• LinkedIn: ~20%
• Reddit: ~14%
• Nextdoor: ~7% (low penetration in rural areas)

Age-group usage (share using any social platform)

• 18–29: ~95% use; heaviest on Instagram, TikTok, YouTube; Snapchat still relevant
• 30–49: ~85% use; Facebook + Instagram core, YouTube nearly universal; TikTok moderate
• 50–64: ~72% use; Facebook primary, YouTube strong; Pinterest notable among women
• 65+: ~50% use; Facebook dominates; YouTube for news, church, how‑to content

Gender breakdown

• Overall use: Women ~75–78%; Men ~70–73%
• Platform skews: Pinterest is predominantly female; Instagram and TikTok lean female; Reddit and X lean male; Facebook and YouTube are broadly balanced

Behavioral trends observed in rural Texas counties of similar size (applicable to Rains County)

• Community and commerce flow through Facebook: Local groups and Marketplace drive buy/sell, events, lost-and-found, weather and road updates, school announcements, and church activities
• Video-first consumption: YouTube for long-form how‑to, local sports, sermons; Facebook Reels/Instagram Reels/TikTok for short local clips; creators often cross-post the same video across platforms
• Event-driven spikes: Severe weather, lake conditions, school sports, hunting/fishing seasons, and local festivals produce sharp engagement increases, especially on Facebook and YouTube
• Messaging hubs: Facebook Messenger is default; WhatsApp use is moderate but higher within family/faith and Spanish-speaking networks
• Trust and discovery: Residents rely on posts from known neighbors, school districts, churches, and county offices; Facebook Groups function as the de facto local bulletin board
• Time-of-day patterns: Highest engagement evenings (6–10 pm) and weekends; older adults are more active weekday mornings; short-form video peaks late evening
• Content that performs: Youth sports photos, community service updates, local restaurant specials, fishing reports, and public-safety notices earn high shares and comments

Notes on methodology

• Figures are best-available county-level estimates derived from recent Pew Research Center platform usage rates, adjusted for rural adoption patterns and age structure typical of small Texas counties. Expect ±3–5 percentage points variance by platform.