Young County

Young County, Texas — key demographics

Population

• Total population: 17,867 (2020 Census)

Age

• Median age: ~40.5 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~23%
• 18 to 64: ~58%
• 65 and over: ~19%

Gender

• Male: ~50%
• Female: ~50%

Race and ethnicity

• Non-Hispanic White: ~75%
• Hispanic or Latino (any race): ~18%
• Black or African American: ~2%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~1%
• Asian: ~0.5%
• Two or more races/Other: ~4%

Households and housing

• Total households: ~6,900
• Average household size: ~2.5
• Family households: ~65% of households
• Married-couple households: ~50% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~30%
• Living alone: ~30% of households
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~73%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census and 2018–2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. Figures rounded for clarity.

Young County, TX snapshot (2025)

Population/density: ≈17,900 residents across 914 sq mi (19.6 people/sq mi). ~7,000 households.

Estimated email users: ≈12,000 adults (about 88% of the 18+ population).

Age distribution of email users (counts, share of users):

• 18–29: ~2,000 (16%)
• 30–49: ~4,300 (36%)
• 50–64: ~3,200 (27%)
• 65+: ~2,500 (21%)

Gender split among users: ≈50% female (6,100) and 50% male (5,900), mirroring the county’s near-even sex ratio.

Digital access trends:

• Home broadband subscription: 80% of households (5,600).
• Any home internet (incl. cellular-only): ~87%.
• Smartphone-only internet households: ~13%.
• No home internet: 13% (900 households).
• Computer access in household: ~85%+. Email use tracks these access patterns; smartphone-only homes show regular email use via mobile apps but lower multi-account/work usage.

Local connectivity notes:

• Highest fixed broadband availability in Graham, Olney, and Newcastle; outlying ranchland commonly uses fixed wireless or satellite.
• Strong 4G/5G coverage along US‑380, TX‑16, and TX‑79 supports mobile email in low-density areas.

Insights: Email penetration is very high across working ages and remains substantial among seniors, with gaps concentrated in the most rural tracts lacking wired broadband.

Young County, TX mobile phone usage overview (2024)

Headline takeaways

• Population baseline: 17,867 (2020 Census). Adult population ~13,800–14,300 (modeled from ACS age structure for similar rural Texas counties).
• Estimated smartphone users: 11,000–12,200 adults (≈78–85% of adults), below Texas’s ~86–90% range.
• Estimated total mobile subscriptions (phones, hotspots, tablets, IoT): 21,000–25,000 lines (≈1.2–1.4 lines per resident), lower per‑capita than large Texas metros but higher reliance for home connectivity.
• Households relying primarily on wireless (cellular) for home internet: 70–78% (vs Texas ~65–72%), reflecting limited wireline options outside towns.

How Young County differs from state-level trends

• Older, more rural profile: A larger 65+ share and dispersed settlement pattern reduce smartphone adoption and 5G capacity relative to Texas averages.
• Higher wireless-only households: More residents use mobile data as a primary home connection than the state average due to patchier fiber/cable footprint outside Graham/Olney.
• 5G composition, not just coverage: Low-band 5G is widespread, but mid-band (2.5 GHz/C-band) is sparse; state averages are increasingly mid-band, delivering higher median speeds in metros.
• Prepaid tilt: Prepaid penetration is higher than the Texas average, driven by income mix, credit preferences, and intermittent wireline availability.
• Capacity variability: Greater speed variability and congestion at peak times compared with urban Texas, where dense mid-band/small-cell builds smooth peaks.

User estimates (2024)

• Adults with any mobile phone: 12,500–13,400 (≈90–94% of adults).
• Adults with a smartphone: 11,000–12,200 (≈78–85% of adults).
• Feature-phone users: 1,200–2,000 adults (notably concentrated 65+).
• Total mobile subscriptions: 21,000–25,000 (phones, hotspots, tablets, LTE/5G fixed wireless, IoT).
• Prepaid share of phone lines: 31–37% (Texas ~24–30%).
• Wireless-only households (no landline voice): 80–88% of households; wireless-primary internet households: 70–78% (Texas ~65–72%).

Demographic breakdown (modeled from rural-Texas ACS, Pew mobile adoption, and county age structure)

• By age
  • 18–34: 92–96% smartphone adoption; accounts for roughly 22–25% of county smartphone users (near state parity).
  • 35–64: 84–90% smartphone adoption; ≈50–55% of county smartphone users (slightly below Texas).
  • 65+: 62–72% smartphone adoption; ≈20–25% of county smartphone users (10–12 points lower than Texas 65+).
• By income/education
  • Lower-income and no-college households show higher prepaid use and higher smartphone-only internet reliance than Texas averages.
• By geography
  • Graham/Olney: Higher 5G availability and indoor reliability; adoption and app usage closer to state norms.
  • Outlying rural areas: More basic phone retention, hotspot use for home access, and service variability.

Digital infrastructure

• Coverage
  • 4G LTE: Broad countywide coverage along primary corridors and towns from national carriers.
  • 5G: Low-band (600–850 MHz) covers most populated areas; mid-band (2.5 GHz n41/C-band n77) is limited versus Texas metros, so capacity/speeds trail state urban medians.
• Sites and density
  • Several dozen macro cell sites serve the county; inter-site distances are longer than metro Texas, limiting indoor penetration and capacity. Small-cell presence is minimal outside civic or school facilities.
• Backhaul and fiber
  • Fiber backhaul is concentrated in Graham and parts of Olney; rural towers often rely on microwave or longer backhaul paths, constraining 5G mid-band upgrades.
• Fixed wireless
  • LTE/5G fixed wireless and CBRS providers fill gaps outside cable/fiber footprints; adoption is materially higher than the Texas average for suburban/urban counties.
• Public safety and priority services
  • FirstNet (AT&T) coverage generally tracks AT&T LTE across major roads and towns; rural dead zones persist in low-lying and heavily wooded areas.
• Public access
  • Community anchors (libraries, schools, county buildings) provide Wi‑Fi that supplements mobile data for homework and telehealth; this role is more pronounced than in urban Texas.
• Buildout outlook
  • State and federal broadband programs (e.g., BEAD) prioritize fiber to un/underserved locations; near-term impact is greater on fixed broadband, with indirect benefits to mobile via improved backhaul.

Usage patterns and implications

• Messaging and social: Heavy reliance on SMS/OTT messaging; rural users show higher usage of data-light apps and Wi‑Fi offload in town.
• Hotspots and tethering: Above-average use for homework, seasonal work, and small business operations due to limited wireline options outside towns.
• Video streaming and telehealth: Usable in towns; performance outside towns can be inconsistent at peak times given low-band 5G dependence.

Method notes

• Population and household baselines from the U.S. Census (2020). Usage estimates modeled from ACS Computer and Internet Use (5‑year), Pew Research smartphone adoption, CTIA connection density trends, and FCC coverage/backhaul patterns for rural North Texas counties. Ranges reflect county size, rural dispersion, and year-to-year network upgrades.

Bottom line Young County’s mobile landscape is defined by near-universal LTE and broad low-band 5G coverage, higher reliance on mobile for home connectivity, and lower mid-band 5G capacity than the Texas average. Adoption is high but trails the state—especially among older adults—while prepaid and hotspot use are meaningfully higher, reflecting the county’s rural infrastructure and demographics.

Young County, TX — social media snapshot (2024 modeled estimates)

Population context

• Residents: ~18,000 (ACS 2022–2023)
• Adults (18+): ~13,600
• Households with internet: ~83–87% (ACS rural TX benchmark)

How many use social media

• Adult social media users: ~10,200 (≈75% of 18+)
• Total social media users including teens 13–17: ~11,500 (≈64% of total population)

Most-used platforms among adults (share of all adults)

• YouTube: ~80%
• Facebook: ~68%
• Instagram: ~42%
• TikTok: ~33%
• Pinterest: ~30%
• Snapchat: ~27%
• LinkedIn: ~20%
• X (Twitter): ~18% Note: County-level platform reporting isn’t published; figures are modeled from Pew Research 2023–2024 national/rural splits, adjusted for Texas demographics.

Age-group usage (share using at least one platform; leading platforms in each group)

• 13–17: 95% use social media; top: YouTube (95%), Snapchat (72%), TikTok (70%), Instagram (60%), Facebook (28%)
• 18–29: 96%; top: YouTube (95%), Instagram (76%), Snapchat (65%), TikTok (62%), Facebook (70%)
• 30–49: 86%; top: Facebook (80%), YouTube (90%), Instagram (55%), TikTok (~40%)
• 50–64: 78%; top: Facebook (70%), YouTube (80%), Instagram (33%), TikTok (~25%)
• 65+: 58%; top: Facebook (50%), YouTube (60%), Instagram (15%), TikTok (~10%)

Gender breakdown

• Overall among social media users: ~52% female, ~48% male (tracks county demographics)
• Platform skews: Facebook ~56% female; Instagram ~57% female; TikTok ~58% female; Pinterest ~70% female; YouTube ~55% male; X ~60% male; LinkedIn ~55% male

Behavioral trends observed in rural North Texas counties like Young

• Facebook is the community hub: Groups and Marketplace drive local news, buy/sell/trade, school and high school sports updates, church and civic events; comments and shares in groups outperform page posts
• Video-first consumption: Strong YouTube watch time for DIY, ranching, land/equipment repair, hunting/fishing; short-form Reels/TikTok see high passive viewing with relatively few local creators
• Messaging-centric for youth: Snapchat and Instagram DMs are primary communication for teens/young adults; Facebook Messenger common for families; WhatsApp pockets among Hispanic residents
• Event-driven spikes: Severe weather, football season, county fair/rodeos, and local emergencies reliably spike live video views and group activity
• Local commerce: Restaurants, boutiques, contractors rely on Facebook + Instagram; geo-targeting within 15–30 miles performs best; offers/coupons and new-arrival posts outperform generic branding
• Timing and device: Mobile-first usage; peak engagement evenings (7–10 pm) and weekend mornings; vertical, lightweight creatives load and perform better given patchy broadband outside Graham/Olney
• Trust patterns: Posts from known community figures, schools, churches, and county/city pages earn higher engagement and shares than anonymous pages

Notes and sources

• Population and internet access: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (2022–2023)
• Platform adoption and demographics: Pew Research Center, Social Media Use in 2023–2024; adjusted to rural Texas context for county-level estimates