Barron County

Here are key, recent demographics for Barron County, Wisconsin.

• Population size

  • 46,711 (2020 Census count)

• Age

  • Median age: ~42–43 years
  • Under 18: ~22%
  • 65 and over: ~21%

• Gender

  • Female: ~50%
  • Male: ~50%

• Racial/ethnic composition (mutually exclusive; ACS 2018–2022)

  • White, non-Hispanic: ~92%
  • Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~3%
  • Two or more races, non-Hispanic: ~2–3%
  • Black or African American, non-Hispanic: ~1%
  • American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic: ~1%
  • Asian, non-Hispanic: ~1%
  • Other, non-Hispanic: <1%

• Households (ACS 2018–2022)

  • Total households: ~19,000–19,500
  • Average household size: ~2.3–2.4
  • Family households: ~60–62% of households (married-couple: ~45–50%)
  • Households with children under 18: ~25–30%
  • Nonfamily households: ~38–40%; living alone: ~30–33% (age 65+ living alone: ~13–15%)

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2018–2022 5-year estimates).

Barron County, WI snapshot (pop. ~46k; ~53 people per sq. mi.)

Estimated email users: 33–36k residents (≈90% of adults), applying national email adoption to local population.

Age distribution of email users (estimated share of users):

• 18–29: 15–18%
• 30–49: 28–32%
• 50–64: 26–30%
• 65+: 18–22%

Gender split: roughly even (about 50/50).

Digital access and trends:

• About 80–85% of households subscribe to home broadband; ~90% have a computer (ACS).
• 10–15% are smartphone‑only internet users.
• Coverage and speeds are strongest in and around Rice Lake and Barron; more unserved/underserved addresses persist in outlying rural townships.
• Connectivity is trending upward as fiber and fixed‑wireless buildouts expand; public Wi‑Fi (libraries/schools) remains a key fallback for some households.

Notes: Figures are estimates based on U.S. email adoption patterns and Census/ACS computer and internet subscription data applied to Barron County’s demographics.

Barron County, WI: mobile-phone usage summary (what’s different from the state)

Context

• Population and households: ~47,000 residents and ~19,000 households. Older age profile than Wisconsin overall and more rural settlement patterns.

User estimates (orders of magnitude, county-level)

• Adult smartphone users: roughly 30,000–33,000 (based on rural smartphone adoption a few points below the statewide rate).
• Households with at least one smartphone: about 16,000–18,000.
• Households relying on a cellular data plan as their primary/only home internet: about 2,000–3,000 (a noticeably higher share than the statewide average). Notes: These are grounded in recent ACS S2801 patterns for rural Wisconsin and Barron’s demographics; verify with the latest ACS 5‑year release for precise figures.

How Barron County differs from Wisconsin overall

• Adoption level: Smartphone ownership is slightly lower than the statewide rate (rural penalty), but still broadly mainstream. The gap is driven by age and income mix rather than lack of interest among younger cohorts.
• “Mobile-only” internet is more common: A higher share of households rely on smartphone tethering or a cellular data plan instead of wired broadband, compared with the Wisconsin average.
• Plan mix: Prepaid and value MVNO plans have a larger footprint than statewide, reflecting price sensitivity and variable credit access. Family-plan penetration is strong but skews toward lower-cost carriers.
• Age effect: Seniors are a larger slice of the population than the state average, and seniors’ smartphone adoption is lower, widening the overall county/state gap. Younger households look similar to state norms.
• Device turnover: Handsets tend to be kept longer than in metro Wisconsin. This slows 5G device penetration and advanced-feature use (eSIM, Wi‑Fi calling optimization, higher-tier hotspot plans).
• Usage patterns: Hotspotting to PCs/tablets for homework, telehealth, and streaming is more common due to patchy wired options; this pushes higher monthly cellular data consumption than you’d expect for a county this size.

Demographic breakdown (drivers of the gap)

• Age: Higher 65+ share than statewide → lower smartphone take-up and more basic plans among seniors; strong adoption among under‑45s.
• Income/education: Median household income and bachelor’s attainment are below the Wisconsin average → greater sensitivity to device and plan pricing, higher prepaid share, and slower replacement cycles.
• Households with children: Similar smartphone adoption to statewide peers, with heavier reliance on hotspots when wired service is limited or unaffordable.
• Linguistic and newcomer communities (e.g., in Barron/Rice Lake): Messaging and calling apps (WhatsApp, Messenger, international calling) see above-average use; budget Android devices are common.

Digital infrastructure (what stands out locally)

• Coverage pattern: 4G LTE is broadly available along the US‑53 corridor (Rice Lake–Cameron–Barron–Chetek) and town centers; coverage and indoor signal quality fall off faster than in metro counties once you’re a few miles off-corridor, especially around lakes/forested areas. This makes external antennas and Wi‑Fi calling more important than is typical statewide.
• 5G footprint: Present in and along the main towns/corridors, but mid‑band capacity is patchier in outlying areas than the state average. Many users remain on LTE or low‑band 5G, which limits speeds during peak hours.
• Fixed wireless access (FWA): T‑Mobile and, in some pockets, Verizon 5G/LTE home internet have become meaningful substitutes where cable/fiber is absent—much more so than in better‑wired Wisconsin counties. This shifts a notable share of home broadband traffic onto the mobile RAN.
• Wired competition: Cable (e.g., Spectrum) covers the larger towns; a local cooperative (Mosaic Technologies) has built fiber in parts of the county, but rural gaps remain. Where only legacy DSL or satellite is available, residents lean harder on mobile/FWA—this is a bigger dynamic than in the state’s metro areas.
• Tower/backhaul density: Fewer macro sites per square mile away from the 53 corridor than in suburban counties; capacity and backhaul constraints surface at lakes/cabins on weekends and in summer, creating a more pronounced seasonal congestion pattern than statewide.
• Public/anchor connectivity: Libraries, schools, and clinics serve as important offload points (Wi‑Fi and telehealth) due to mobile-only households; reliance on these anchors is higher than the state average.

Implications and trends to watch

• Mobile networks in Barron carry a larger share of “home” traffic than in most Wisconsin counties, making capacity upgrades (mid‑band 5G, added sectors/backhaul) more impactful locally.
• The lapse of the Affordable Connectivity Program has a bigger relative effect here, likely nudging more households toward prepaid plans and mobile/FWA substitutions.
• As local fiber expands, expect a gradual decline in mobile-only households, but the county will trail statewide timelines unless buildouts accelerate beyond towns and main roads.

Where to validate/refresh numbers

• ACS S2801 (Types of Computers and Internet Subscriptions) for county vs state smartphone and cellular-only household shares.
• FCC National Broadband Map and NTIA Indicators of Broadband Need for wired availability and mobile signal metrics.
• Carrier coverage maps and local ISPs (Mosaic Technologies, Spectrum) for current buildouts; carrier FWA availability checkers for footprint changes.

Below is a concise, planning-grade snapshot of social media usage in Barron County, WI. County-level platforms rarely publish exact stats; figures are estimates synthesized from Pew Research Center (2024) US usage, platform ad-reach tools, and the county’s older-leaning age profile.

Quick context

• Population: ~46,000
• Estimated social media users: 30,000–33,000 (about 65–72% of total population; roughly 75–82% of residents age 13+)
• Mobile-first usage: ~80%

Age mix of social media users (share of local users)

• 13–17: 10–12%
• 18–24: 12–14%
• 25–34: 17–19%
• 35–44: 17–19%
• 45–54: 15–17%
• 55–64: 12–14%
• 65+: 10–12%

Gender

• Overall user base: ~51% female / 49% male
• Platform skews: Facebook/Instagram slightly female (55/45), Pinterest strongly female (70/30); YouTube slight male lean (55/45); Snapchat female-leaning (60/40); TikTok near-even

Most-used platforms (share of local social media users, monthly; estimates)

• YouTube: 75–80% (≈23k–26k users)
• Facebook (incl. Messenger): 70–75% (≈21k–25k)
• Instagram: 35–40% (≈11k–13k)
• Snapchat: 25–30% (≈8k–10k)
• TikTok: 25–30% (≈8k–10k)
• Pinterest: 20–25% (≈6k–8k)
• LinkedIn: 15–20% (≈5k–6k)
• X (Twitter): 10–15% (≈3k–5k)
• Reddit: 8–12% (≈2.5k–4k)
• Nextdoor: <5% (low local penetration; Facebook Groups fill “neighborhood” role)

Behavioral trends to know

• Community-first on Facebook: Local Groups (Buy/Sell/Trade, hunting/fishing, school/booster, churches, road/weather updates) drive daily engagement. Marketplace is a top destination for secondhand goods and light ag/farm equipment.
• Event-driven spikes: Barron County Fair, high school sports, fishing opener, deer season, and winter storms trigger sharp rises in posting, sharing, and live updates.
• Local info hubs: Sheriff’s office, school districts, county/highway departments, and local radio pages see high trust and share rates for alerts and closures.
• Short-form video growth: Reels/TikTok increasingly used by small businesses, youth sports, and outdoor recreation; authentic, low-polish clips outperform polished ads.
• Messaging habits: Facebook Messenger for families/teams; Snapchat groups popular among teens/young adults.
• Time-of-day patterns: Peak engagement 7–9 pm; morning scroll 6:30–8 am; Marketplace browsing higher on weekends.
• Age splits in use: Older residents concentrate on Facebook/YouTube (church, obits, civic news); younger users default to Snapchat/TikTok/Instagram and use Facebook mainly for Groups/events.
• Purchase behavior: Strong response to “local pride,” giveaways, limited-time deals; preference for local pickup; reviews and word-of-mouth in Groups influence decisions.

Notes

• Figures are directionally reliable but not census-precise. Use them as planning benchmarks; refine with your own page insights and platform geo-ad tools targeting Barron County. Sources: Pew Research Center 2024 US social media usage, Meta/TikTok/Snapchat ad reach tools, and ACS age structure for Barron County.