Price County

Price County, Wisconsin — key demographics

Population size

• Total population: 13,801 (2020 Decennial Census)

Age

• Median age: ~50 years (ACS 2018–2022)
• Under 18: ~19%
• 18–64: ~57%
• 65 and over: ~24%

Gender

• Male: ~51%
• Female: ~49%

Racial/ethnic composition (Hispanic can be of any race; ACS 2018–2022)

• White alone: ~95%
• American Indian/Alaska Native: ~2%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Black or African American: ~0–1%
• Asian: ~0–1%
• Hispanic/Latino (any race): ~2%

Households and housing (ACS 2018–2022)

• Households: ~6,200
• Average household size: ~2.2
• Family households: ~60% of households; married-couple households ~50%
• Households with children under 18: ~22%
• Nonfamily households: ~40%; living alone ~33–35%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~80–85%
• Housing units: ~9,500–10,000, with a high share of seasonal/recreational units

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

Price County, WI snapshot

• Population (2020): 14,054 across ≈1,254 sq mi; density ≈11 people/sq mi, with small hubs in Phillips and Park Falls.
• Estimated email users: ≈10,200 adults (≈91% of ~11,200 adults), reflecting high statewide internet adoption and near-universal email use among internet users.
• Age distribution of email users (est.): 18–34 ≈21% (2.1k), 35–54 ≈31% (3.2k), 55–64 ≈18% (1.8k), 65+ ≈30% (3.1k). The county’s older age profile shifts a larger share of users into 55+ despite slightly lower adoption rates in that cohort.
• Gender split (est.): ≈51% female, 49% male among users.
• Digital access and trends: About three-quarters of households maintain a home broadband subscription; 8–10% are smartphone‑only. Fiber is established in town centers and along main corridors, while DSL and fixed wireless predominate in outlying areas; satellite fills remaining gaps. Connectivity is noticeably weaker outside the two cities due to very low density and forested terrain, but recent state and federal investments are expanding fiber and 100/20 Mbps coverage.

Overall, email is a mature, near‑ubiquitous channel among connected adults, with usage skewed toward middle‑aged and older residents by population composition rather than preference.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Price County, Wisconsin (2025 modeled estimate)

Topline

• Price County is a sparsely populated, older, rural county where mobile adoption is high but measurably below Wisconsin’s average for smartphones, and reliance on cellular in place of wired broadband is notably higher than the state.
• 4G LTE is the primary workhorse; 5G is present mainly on low-band spectrum with limited mid-band capacity near towns and along primary corridors. UScellular retains a meaningful footprint alongside AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile.

User estimates

• Total mobile phone users: ~10,000 adults
  • Basis: ~13.5k residents; ~11.1k adults 18+; ~90% mobile phone ownership among adults in rural northern WI counties.
• Smartphone users: ~8,000
  • Basis: ~80% of adult mobile users using smartphones (rural/older-county discount vs statewide).
• Basic/feature-phone users: ~2,000
• Households relying primarily on cellular data for home internet: ~1,100–1,300
  • Basis: ~6.2–6.6k households; 18–20% cellular-only reliance in rural northern WI (higher than the state average).

Demographic breakdown and usage patterns

• Age (distinct from Wisconsin overall)
  • Higher share of residents 65+ than the state drives lower smartphone penetration and more voice/SMS-centric usage.
  • Estimated smartphone adoption by age:
    • 18–34: ~93–96%
    • 35–64: ~86–90%
    • 65+: ~60–68% (well below state average for seniors)
• Income and plans
  • Median household income trails the state average, correlating with higher prepaid usage, longer device replacement cycles, and a higher share of single-line plans.
• Work and mobility
  • Forestry, manufacturing, outdoor and seasonal work increase demand for reliable voice coverage, rugged devices, hotspot use, and out-of-town roaming on weekends and during recreation seasons.

Digital infrastructure points

• Coverage and technology mix
  • LTE is ubiquitous in and around Phillips, Park Falls, Prentice, and along main corridors (notably WI-13 and WI-70). Coverage thins in heavily forested interior areas and river valleys, where signal fades and handoffs are more common.
  • 5G availability is predominantly low-band ( DSS/600–850 MHz) with limited mid‑band capacity near towns; performance improvements over LTE are modest outside town centers.
• Carriers and network characteristics
  • AT&T: Broad rural LTE footprint; low-band 5G and FirstNet on key sites serving public safety.
  • Verizon: Strong LTE; low-band 5G widespread; mid-band/C‑band presence sparse and town-centric.
  • T-Mobile: 600 MHz 5G covers primary corridors; capacity can dip in low-density zones far from towns.
  • UScellular: Material presence in and around towns and lakes/forest access points; useful for in-vehicle coverage on secondary roads; 5G low-band in select sectors.
• Backhaul and capacity
  • A mix of fiber-fed and microwave-fed macro sites; fewer fiber laterals than the state average limits mid-band 5G expansion and peak speeds.
  • Fixed wireless access (FWA) is available but spotty; take‑up is constrained by signal quality at treeline and lakefront properties.
• Redundancy and resilience
  • Weather, foliage density, and long inter-site distances create more frequent micro‑dead‑zones than state urban/suburban areas. Public-safety and school districts lean on AT&T FirstNet and multi-carrier failover for resilience.

How Price County differs from Wisconsin overall

• Smartphone adoption: Lower by roughly 5–8 percentage points due to an older age profile and lower incomes; basic-phone retention is meaningfully higher.
• Cellular-only home internet: Higher by roughly 6–10 percentage points, reflecting limited wired broadband options in outlying areas and greater FWA/hotspot reliance.
• 5G experience: More low-band, less mid-band. State metro areas benefit from wide C‑band/2.5 GHz deployments; Price County users see smaller 5G capacity gains over LTE outside town cores.
• Plan mix: Higher prepaid and single‑line share; fewer premium unlimited family bundles than the state’s suburban counties.
• Seasonal load: More pronounced weekend and seasonal congestion around recreation sites than the statewide pattern, which is steadier in metro areas.

Method note

• Figures are 2025 modeled estimates derived from recent ACS computer/mobile adoption patterns for rural Wisconsin, FCC mobile coverage filings, publicly reported carrier buildouts, and national smartphone adoption benchmarks applied to Price County’s older age structure and rural density.

Social media in Price County, Wisconsin — snapshot (2025)

How this was built: Figures are county-specific estimates derived from Price County’s age/gender mix (U.S. Census/ACS latest available) combined with Pew Research Center’s 2023–2024 platform-usage rates by age and rural status. Percentages reflect share of residents in each group who use the platform at least occasionally. Multiple platforms per person are common.

Population and user base

• Population: ~14,000 residents; older-than-average age profile.
• Estimated social media users (age 13+): 9,800 residents (70% of total population; ~85–90% of adults).

Age mix of social media users (share of users)

• 13–17: 9%
• 18–29: 16%
• 30–49: 33%
• 50–64: 24%
• 65+: 18%

Gender breakdown of social media users

• Women: ~53%
• Men: ~47%

Most-used platforms among adults (18+) in Price County (estimated reach)

• YouTube: 82%
• Facebook: 71%
• Instagram: 39%
• Pinterest: 36%
• TikTok: 30%
• Snapchat: 27%
• WhatsApp: 16%
• X (Twitter): 15%
• LinkedIn: 15%
• Reddit: 14%
• Nextdoor: 6%

Top age-group patterns (platform reach within each group, estimated)

• Teens (13–17): YouTube ~95%, Snapchat ~70%, TikTok ~65%, Instagram ~60%, Facebook ~25%.
• Young adults (18–29): YouTube ~95%, Instagram ~75–80%, Snapchat ~60–65%, TikTok ~60–65%, Facebook ~60–70%.
• Adults 30–49: YouTube ~90%, Facebook ~75–80%, Instagram ~50–55%, Pinterest ~40–45%, TikTok ~30–35%.
• Adults 50–64: YouTube ~80%, Facebook ~70–75%, Pinterest ~35–40%, Instagram ~30–35%, TikTok ~20%.
• Seniors 65+: Facebook ~50%, YouTube ~55–60%, Pinterest ~25–30%, Instagram ~15–20%, TikTok ~10–12%.

Behavioral trends and local patterns

• Facebook as the digital town square: High participation in community groups (schools, churches, snowmobile/ATV clubs, youth sports), event announcements, local news, lost-and-found, and especially Marketplace for buying/selling. Government and public-safety pages drive sharp spikes during storms, road closures, and school announcements.
• Video-first consumption: Short-form video (Facebook Reels, Instagram Reels, TikTok) grows as local businesses and residents cross-post clips; YouTube anchors longer DIY, repair, hunting/fishing, forestry, and homestead content.
• Messaging habits: Facebook Messenger is the default for most adults; Snapchat dominates among teens and college-age residents; WhatsApp remains niche.
• Gendered use: Women over-index in Facebook Groups and Pinterest (crafts, recipes, home projects), while men over-index on YouTube (how-to, outdoor, equipment) and Reddit (news, tech, sports).
• Rural bandwidth reality: Engagement concentrates on mobile-friendly formats and short videos; photo posts and concise updates outperform link-outs. Activity is strongest evenings and around weather or community events.
• Business usage: Small businesses and venues rely on Facebook Pages and boosted posts for reach; Instagram is used by hospitality/tourism and boutiques; LinkedIn and X see limited local utility beyond professional networks and regional news.
• Cross-posting behavior: Many creators and businesses produce once (vertical video) and distribute across TikTok, Instagram Reels, and Facebook Reels to maximize local reach.

Key takeaways

• Reach: Roughly 7 in 10 residents and nearly 9 in 10 adults use at least one social platform.
• Platform hierarchy: YouTube and Facebook dominate countywide reach; Instagram and Pinterest are meaningful seconds; TikTok/Snapchat are strong with under-35s; LinkedIn/X/Reddit are niche.
• Content that performs: Local, timely, visual posts—especially short video—combined with group sharing and Messenger follow-up deliver the most reliable engagement.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (ACS, latest available for Price County); Pew Research Center, Social Media Use (2023–2024). Estimates adjust national platform rates to Price County’s older, rural-skewed demographics.