Robertson County

Robertson County, Texas — key demographics

Population

• 16,757 (2020 Decennial Census)
• ~16.9k (ACS 2018–2022 5‑year estimate)

Age

• Median age: ~39.7 years
• Under 18: ~22.8%
• 18–64: ~58.6%
• 65 and over: ~18.6%

Sex

• Male: ~51.1%
• Female: ~48.9%

Race/ethnicity (mutually exclusive)

• Non-Hispanic White: ~56%
• Non-Hispanic Black: ~22%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~21%
• Non-Hispanic other (Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, multiracial, etc.): ~1–2%

Households and housing

• Households: ~6,400
• Average household size: ~2.55
• Family households: ~66% (married-couple ~47%)
• Homeownership rate: ~74% (renter-occupied ~26%)
• Housing units: ~7,500; vacancy ~14%
• Median gross rent: ~$830

Income and poverty

• Median household income: ~$54,000
• Per capita income: ~$26,800
• Persons in poverty: ~17–18%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates (tables DP05, DP02, DP03, DP04). Figures are ACS estimates.

Robertson County, TX snapshot

• Population/density: 17,074 residents (2020) across ~856 sq mi ≈ 20 people/sq mi.
• Estimated email users: ~11,000 adult users (≈84% of ~13,100 adults), reflecting near‑universal email use among connected adults.

Age distribution of email users (approximate)

• 18–34: 27% ≈ 2,970
• 35–54: 37% ≈ 4,070
• 55–64: 17% ≈ 1,870
• 65+: 19% ≈ 2,090

Gender split among users

• Male ≈ 51% (≈5,610)
• Female ≈ 49% (≈5,390) Minimal gender gap in adoption among adults.

Digital access and connectivity trends

• Household internet: ~78% subscribe to fixed broadband; an additional ~9–10% are smartphone‑only internet households.
• Availability: Fixed broadband meeting at least 25/3 Mbps is available to ~90% of locations; 100/20 Mbps to ~80–85%, with fiber concentrated in towns (Franklin, Hearne, Calvert) and along major corridors; coverage thins in outlying rural tracts.
• Mobile: 4G/5G covers >95% of populated areas, underpinning high email access on phones.
• Implications: Lower density and longer last‑mile loops suppress wireline choices outside town centers, but smartphone reliance keeps email reach high even where fixed options lag.

Mobile phone usage in Robertson County, Texas — 2025 snapshot

Baseline and user estimates

• Population: 16,757 (U.S. Census 2020); ~17,300 in 2023 Census vintage estimates.
• Adults (18+): ~13,500–13,800.
• Mobile phone users (any mobile): ~12,800–13,100 adults, assuming ~95% adult mobile ownership (Pew Research adult benchmark applied to rural counties).
• Smartphone users: ~11,300–12,000 adults, assuming 83–87% rural adult smartphone ownership (lower than Texas’s ~90–92%).
• Mobile-only internet reliance: materially higher than the Texas average. Expect a larger share of adults using smartphones or hotspots as their primary home internet substitute, reflecting lower wireline availability and affordability relative to urban Texas.

How usage in Robertson County differs from Texas overall

• Adoption gap: Smartphone ownership runs roughly 3–7 percentage points lower than the Texas adult average, with the gap widest among adults 65+.
• Plan mix: Higher reliance on prepaid and MVNO plans than the statewide mix, driven by price sensitivity and weaker device financing options compared with metro areas.
• Mobile-only households: Greater dependence on mobile data for primary internet access than the state average due to limited or costlier fixed broadband in outlying areas.
• Upgrade cycles and devices: Longer device replacement cycles and a more price-sensitive device mix (greater Android share) relative to Texas’s urban counties.
• Network experience: More LTE fallback and lower mid-band 5G availability than Texas metros; peak-hour slowdowns are more noticeable and coverage is more variable indoors and in low-lying or wooded areas.

Demographic breakdown of mobile users (estimates anchored to county age profile)

• By age cohort (adults only; counts rounded):
  • 18–34: ~3,900–4,200 smartphone users (ownership ~92–96% within this cohort).
  • 35–64: ~6,000–6,600 smartphone users (ownership ~88–92%).
  • 65+: ~1,500–1,900 smartphone users (ownership ~65–75%; the largest gap vs state).
• By income and plan behavior:
  • Lower-income households in the county make up a larger share than in Texas overall, correlating with higher prepaid adoption, family/shared plans, and hotspot substitution for home broadband.
• By race/ethnicity context:
  • The county has a higher non-Hispanic White share and a higher Black share, and a lower Hispanic share than Texas as a whole. Differences in smartphone uptake locally are explained more by age, income, and coverage than by race/ethnicity; ownership is high across groups but mobile-only internet use is more common among lower-income households.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Technologies in use: 4G LTE is the baseline in most rural blocks; low-band 5G covers towns and major corridors; mid-band 5G capacity is concentrated along highways and population centers and is sparse in outlying areas.
• Coverage geography: Stronger service along TX-6 and US-79 corridors and in/around Franklin and Hearne; patchier coverage on ranchland and forested areas away from main roads. Outdoor coverage is near-universal across populated areas, while indoor coverage varies with construction type and distance to towers.
• Tower and capacity dynamics: Fewer macro sites per square mile than urban Texas, with larger cell sizes. Microwave backhaul persists on some rural sites; capacity upgrades tend to arrive later than in metro counties.
• Fixed alternatives shaping mobile use: Fixed wireless and satellite fill gaps where fiber/coax are absent, but many households still lean on mobile data and hotspots, reinforcing higher mobile-only reliance than the Texas average.
• Near-term trajectory (2024–2026): Continued 5G mid-band infill along primary corridors and co-location on existing structures; fiber expansion from state and federal broadband programs should gradually reduce mobile-only reliance near new builds while improving backhaul for nearby cell sites.

Key takeaways

• Estimated adult mobile users: ~12.8–13.1k; smartphone users: ~11.3–12.0k.
• Smartphone adoption is solid but trails Texas by several points, especially among seniors.
• Prepaid/MVNO use and mobile-only internet reliance are materially higher than statewide norms.
• Network experience is more variable than in Texas metros due to sparser mid-band 5G and larger cell sizes, though corridor coverage is good and improving.

Social media usage snapshot: Robertson County, Texas (2025)

Headline numbers

• Population: ≈17.4k residents (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 estimate).
• Active social media users: ≈12.7k, about 73% of the total population (modeled from U.S. penetration, DataReportal, Jan 2025).
• Gender split of social media users: ≈53% female, 47% male (U.S.-level user mix applied locally; DataReportal 2025).

Most-used platforms (share of adults who use each; Pew Research Center, 2024; applied as local reach expectations)

• YouTube: 83% of adults
• Facebook: 68%
• Instagram: 47%
• Pinterest: 35%
• TikTok: 33%
• Snapchat: 30%
• LinkedIn: 30%
• X (Twitter): ~22% Notes: At a ~12.7k user base, rough local reach implies YouTube ~10.5k, Facebook ~8.6k, Instagram ~6.0k, Pinterest ~4.4k, TikTok ~4.2k, Snapchat/LinkedIn ~3.8k, X ~2.8k users. Rural Texas communities typically over-index on Facebook and YouTube relative to newer text-centric platforms.

Age groups (who uses what, locally)

• Teens (13–17): Heavy Snapchat and TikTok; YouTube near-universal. Instagram secondary. Most activity is private/messaging-based; high responsiveness to school- and sports-related content.
• Young adults (18–24): TikTok, Instagram, YouTube lead; Snapchat still strong. Facebook used primarily for events, groups, Marketplace.
• Adults (25–44): Facebook + Instagram core; Reels and TikTok for discovery; YouTube for how-to and product research. Pinterest notable among women.
• Mid-life (45–64): Facebook and YouTube dominate; Pinterest for projects, recipes, home. Instagram adoption growing; TikTok use increasing but selective.
• Seniors (65+): Facebook and YouTube primary; platform use is community- and family-driven.

Behavioral trends in a rural Texas county context

• Facebook as the community hub: Local groups, school updates, high school sports, church and civic events, and Marketplace drive consistent engagement. Posts with people, recognitions, and event photos outperform brand-only content.
• Video-first consumption: Short-form video (Reels/TikTok) performs best for awareness; 15–45 seconds, face-forward, captioned. YouTube used for longer tutorials, local government/school board replays, and sermon uploads.
• Local trust signals: Content from recognizable locals (coaches, pastors, small-business owners) and institutions (schools, county offices, volunteer fire/EMS) carries outsized credibility and shareability.
• Time-of-day patterns: Peaks around 6–9 pm on weekdays; secondary peaks at lunch (12–1 pm). Weekends see strong morning activity tied to events and sports recaps.
• Mobile-first behavior: The vast majority of social activity is on phones; vertical, captioned, sound-off-friendly creative works best.
• Discovery to action: Users discover via TikTok/Reels/YouTube, verify details on Facebook pages or groups, and transact via DMs or Marketplace. Event RSVPs and last-minute changes are most effective on Facebook.
• Platform skews: Women over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube, Reddit, and X. LinkedIn presence exists but is modest; activity concentrates in education, healthcare, energy, utilities, and public sector roles.

Method note and sources

• County-level social media counts are not directly published. Figures above model Robertson County’s users by applying national usage rates to the county’s 2023 population (U.S. Census Bureau; Pew Research Center, “Social Media Use in 2024”; DataReportal, Digital 2025: USA). These benchmarks are widely used for small-market planning and align with observed rural Texas behavior.