Marquette County

Marquette County, Wisconsin — key demographics (latest U.S. Census Bureau ACS 2019–2023 5-year estimates unless noted; 2020 Census for decennial total)

Population size

• Total population: 15,592 (2020 Census); roughly stable per 2019–2023 ACS

Age

• Median age: ~49–50 years
• Under 18: ~18%
• 18–64: ~55%
• 65 and over: ~26%

Gender

• Female: ~50%
• Male: ~50%

Race and ethnicity

• White alone: ~95%
• Black or African American alone: ~1%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1%
• Asian alone: ~0–1%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~4%
• Non-Hispanic White: ~92%

Households and housing

• Total households: ~6,600
• Average household size: ~2.3
• Family households: ~64% of households
• Married-couple households: ~52% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~22%
• One-person households: ~30% (including ~14% age 65+ living alone)
• Owner-occupied housing: ~83% of occupied units

Insights

• Older age structure than Wisconsin overall, with about one in four residents 65+
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White population with small but present Hispanic/Latino community
• Small household sizes and high owner-occupancy consistent with a rural, aging county

• Population and density: Marquette County, WI has ≈15,600 residents (≈34 people per sq. mile; highly rural).
• Estimated email users: ≈11,800 adult users. Method: ≈12,800 adults × ≈92% email adoption among U.S. adults.
• Age distribution of email users (counts, share of email users):
  • 18–34: ≈2,470 (≈21%)
  • 35–64: ≈5,990 (≈51%)
  • 65+: ≈3,315 (≈28%)
• Gender split among email users: roughly even, Female ≈50–51% (≈5.9k), Male ≈49–50% (≈5.8k). Slight female tilt reflects the county’s older age profile.
• Digital access and devices:
  • Households with a broadband subscription: ≈80%
  • Computer access (any computer in household): ≈88%
  • Adult smartphone adoption: ≈85%+
  • Smartphone-only internet households: ≈10%
• Connectivity and local access:
  • Fixed broadband availability: ≥90% of homes have at least one 25/3 Mbps option; ≈70–75% have 100/20 Mbps-or-better.
  • 4G LTE covers virtually all populated areas; 5G present near Montello, Westfield, and along I‑39 corridors.
  • Public Wi‑Fi via libraries/schools supplements access for non-subscribers.
• Trend: Fiber builds and subsidized projects (2021–2024) are raising 100/20+ availability and nudging subscription rates upward, but rural distance and low density keep costs and gaps higher than urban Wisconsin.

Summary: Mobile phone usage in Marquette County, Wisconsin

Scope and basis

• Population anchor: 15,592 (2020 Census). Household count estimated at 6,750 (population/avg. household size ≈ 2.3). Adult share ≈ 77–78% of population (12,000 adults), consistent with ACS patterns for rural Wisconsin.
• Metrics below synthesize the latest available county-level American Community Survey (ACS 2018–2022 5‑year), Pew Research rural adoption benchmarks (2023), and FCC mobile coverage filings current through 2024. Figures are county-specific estimates designed to be directly comparable with statewide Wisconsin figures.

User estimates

• Adult smartphone users: ≈ 10,200–10,800 (about 84–88% of adults). This is several points below Wisconsin’s adult smartphone penetration (≈ 88–91%), reflecting the county’s older age profile and rural infrastructure.
• Households with a smartphone: ≈ 5,500–5,900 (about 81–87% of households), vs Wisconsin ≈ 88–91%.
• Cellular data–only internet households (no wired/fixed subscription): ≈ 850–1,050 households (12–16%), materially higher than the statewide share (≈ 7–10%). This indicates heavier reliance on mobile data for home connectivity.
• Prepaid and assistance participation: Elevated relative to state averages, driven by lower median incomes and the post‑2024 wind‑down of ACP. Expect a gradual shift from standalone mobile hotspots to bundled mobile plans with hotspot allowances.

Demographic breakdown of usage

• Age:
  • 18–34: very high adoption (≈ 95%+ smartphone use), near parity with Wisconsin.
  • 35–64: high adoption (≈ 88–92%), 2–3 points below Wisconsin norms.
  • 65+: markedly lower adoption (≈ 60–70% use smartphones and ≈ 75–85% use any mobile phone), trailing statewide senior adoption by several points. This age mix is the single largest driver of the county’s lower overall smartphone share.
• Income and education:
  • Lower median household income than the state leads to higher cellular‑only connectivity and greater prepaid plan usage. Households below 200% FPL are notably more likely to be mobile‑only for internet access.
• Housing and geography:
  • High owner‑occupancy and dispersed settlement correlate with fewer wired options and increased dependence on mobile service in outlying areas, compared with Wisconsin’s urban/suburban counties.

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Coverage:
  • 4G LTE: Near‑ubiquitous outdoor coverage from national carriers across populated corridors; indoor reliability varies in low‑density lake/forest areas.
  • 5G: Present along the I‑39 corridor and in/near Montello and Westfield; patchier in northern/eastern townships. County 5G footprint lags Wisconsin’s urbanized counties.
• Capacity and speeds:
  • Typical median mobile download speeds in-town are moderate (often 30–80 Mbps) and drop in fringe/rural zones due to lower tower density, mid‑band spectrum gaps, and foliage/terrain. Wisconsin’s statewide medians are higher, especially in metro counties with denser mid‑band 5G.
• Tower density and backhaul:
  • Fewer macro sites per square mile than state urban averages; backhaul to some rural sites is still microwave‑dependent, constraining peak capacity compared with fiber‑fed sites seen in metro areas.
• Reliability gaps:
  • Dead zones persist in low‑lying, wooded, and lakeside areas, and along lesser‑traveled county roads away from I‑39. This pattern diverges from statewide conditions where continuous 5G/LTE coverage is typical across major arterials and most secondary roads.

Trends that diverge from Wisconsin overall

• Lower smartphone penetration, driven by a larger 65+ population share.
• Higher share of cellular data–only households, indicating heavier reliance on mobile networks for primary home internet.
• Slower and more uneven 5G build‑out and lower median mobile speeds relative to state averages, tied to tower spacing and backhaul.
• Greater sensitivity to affordability changes (e.g., post‑ACP), increasing the likelihood of prepaid and mobile‑only behaviors versus the state as a whole.

Implications

• Mobile networks function as a primary on‑ramp to broadband for a meaningful minority of households, not just a supplemental service.
• Investments that add mid‑band 5G carriers on existing sites, infill small cells in town centers, and expand fiber backhaul will disproportionately improve real‑world performance versus headline “coverage” percentages.
• Outreach and device affordability programs targeted to seniors can close most of the remaining adoption gap with the state.

Key takeaways in numbers

• Adults: ~12,000; adult smartphone users: ~10,200–10,800.
• Households: ~6,750; households with smartphones: ~5,500–5,900.
• Cellular data–only households: ~850–1,050 (12–16%), notably above the statewide ~7–10%.
• 5G availability: present but uneven; materially behind Wisconsin’s metro counties in footprint and capacity.

Social media usage in Marquette County, Wisconsin (2024–2025, locally adjusted snapshot)

How many residents use social media (adults 18+):

• Share of adults using at least one major platform: ~75–80%
• Daily users among social media users: ~70–75%

Most-used platforms (share of adults who use the platform; locally adjusted from Pew Research Center 2024 patterns for an older, rural county profile):

• YouTube: 78–83%
• Facebook: 70–75%
• Instagram: 35–40%
• TikTok: 23–28%
• Snapchat: 18–23%
• Pinterest: 35–40%
• LinkedIn: 22–27%
• X (Twitter): 18–22%
• Reddit: 14–18%
• WhatsApp: 17–21%

Age-group profile (share of each age group using each platform, approximate):

• Ages 18–29: YouTube 90–95; Instagram 70–80; Snapchat 60–70; TikTok 55–65; Facebook 45–55
• Ages 30–49: YouTube 88–92; Facebook 75–82; Instagram 50–60; TikTok 30–40; Snapchat 25–35; Pinterest 30–40
• Ages 50–64: Facebook 70–78; YouTube 75–82; Pinterest 35–45; Instagram 25–35; TikTok 15–25
• Ages 65+: Facebook 58–65; YouTube 45–55; Pinterest 25–35; Instagram 10–20; TikTok 8–15

Gender breakdown (share using each platform; approximate):

• Women: Facebook 72–78; Instagram 38–45; Pinterest 48–55; YouTube 72–78; TikTok 25–30; Snapchat 20–25; X 16–20; Reddit 8–12; LinkedIn 20–25
• Men: YouTube 82–88; Facebook 64–70; Instagram 32–38; TikTok 20–25; Snapchat 16–22; X 19–23; Reddit 16–20; Pinterest 18–24; LinkedIn 22–28

Behavioral trends observed in older, rural Wisconsin counties that fit Marquette County’s profile:

• Facebook is the community hub: heavy reliance on local groups and pages (schools, county offices, EMS, churches, youth sports, buy/sell/trade). Marketplace and event posts drive consistent engagement.
• YouTube for how-to and local interest: hunting/fishing, home repair, small-engine/land management, and local government recordings get steady views; long-form is acceptable if practical.
• Short-form video is growing but segmented: TikTok and Instagram Reels skew young; cross-posted short videos on Facebook reach 30–49 and 50–64 cohorts.
• Messaging is anchored in Facebook Messenger; SMS remains important; WhatsApp is secondary and situational (family, small businesses).
• Local news consumption concentrates on Facebook; weather, road closures, school updates, and law enforcement posts see spikes and shares.
• Seasonality matters: engagement peaks around school calendars, hunting seasons, county fairs, lake/ice conditions, and storm events.
• Best-performing content traits: concise local relevance, photos of recognizable places/people, clear calls to action (dates/times/locations), and practical utility; overtly national political content fragments audiences and reduces broad engagement.
• Timing: engagement commonly peaks early morning (6–8 a.m.) and evening (7–9 p.m.), with weekend late-morning surges tied to events and Marketplace activity.
• Ad/organic mix: informational posts and event-driven boosts outperform generic branding; older users respond to straightforward creative and phone-call CTAs; younger users respond to video-first creative and DM/website CTAs.

Notes on data: Exact, platform-published user counts are not released at the county level. Figures above are locally adjusted estimates derived from Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. platform adoption by age and gender, applied to Marquette County’s older, rural demographic profile (ACS age structure), with rural-Wisconsin behavioral patterns incorporated for context.