Taylor County

Taylor County, Wisconsin — key demographics (U.S. Census Bureau: 2020 Decennial Census; 2019–2023 ACS 5-year estimates)

Population size

• Total population (2020 Census): 20,310
• Change since 2010: −1.8% (2010: 20,689)

Age

• Median age: ~44.5 years
• Under 18: ~23%
• 18 to 64: ~57%
• 65 and over: ~20%

Gender

• Male: ~50.5%
• Female: ~49.5%

Race and ethnicity (Hispanic can be of any race)

• White (non-Hispanic): ~94.5%
• Hispanic or Latino: ~2.8%
• Two or more races (non-Hispanic): ~1.5%
• American Indian and Alaska Native (non-Hispanic): ~0.5%
• Asian (non-Hispanic): ~0.3%
• Black or African American (non-Hispanic): ~0.2%
• Some other race (non-Hispanic): ~0.2%

Households and families

• Total households: ~8,100
• Average household size: ~2.46
• Family households: ~65% of households
• Married-couple households: ~54% of households
• Households with children under 18: ~28%
• Nonfamily households: ~35%
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~79%

Insights

• Small, stable population with a relatively older age profile than the state overall.
• Predominantly non-Hispanic White, with modest Hispanic and multiracial growth in recent years.
• Household structure is family- and owner-occupied–oriented, with smaller household sizes typical of rural Wisconsin.

• Estimated email users: ~13,500 residents (out of ~20,900; 2020 Census), based on local internet subscription levels and U.S. adult email adoption rates.
• Age distribution of email users (share of users):
  • 18–34: ~27%
  • 35–54: ~38%
  • 55–64: ~18%
  • 65+: ~17%
• Gender split among users: roughly even (~51% female, ~49% male), mirroring population makeup and near-parity in email adoption by gender.
• Digital access and devices (Taylor County, ACS 2018–2022):
  • ~79% of households have a broadband subscription (any technology).
  • ~89% of households have a computer; ~7–9% are smartphone‑only internet users.
  • ~15–20% of households lack home internet, which suppresses email use among seniors and lower‑income residents.
• Connectivity and density context:
  • Sparse population density (~21 people per square mile across ~980 sq mi) increases last‑mile costs and dependence on DSL and fixed wireless outside Medford and village centers.
  • Fiber availability is concentrated in and near population centers; ongoing state/federal grants are expanding 100/20+ Mbps coverage, but gaps remain in outlying townships.

Insights: Email usage is near-universal among working-age adults and students, with the main constraints being rural broadband gaps and smartphone‑only access, which shift usage to mobile and limit heavy email workloads.

Summary of mobile phone usage in Taylor County, Wisconsin (2024)

Context and scale

• Population and households: 20,895 residents (2020 Census); approximately 8,200–8,400 households. Adult (18+) population roughly 16,000.
• Rural profile: Taylor County is predominantly rural with a relatively older age structure than Wisconsin overall, which influences device adoption and plan types.

User estimates (adults and households)

• Adults with any mobile phone: ≈15,000–15,300 (about 93–96% of adults). This trails Wisconsin’s statewide penetration slightly, reflecting rural and older-age effects.
• Adult smartphone users: ≈13,500–14,000 (about 84–88% of adults). This is typically 4–6 percentage points lower than Wisconsin overall.
• Wireless-only households (no landline): ≈5,000–5,300 (about 60–64% of households). This rate is modestly below the statewide rate, consistent with rural landline retention and older residents.
• Households relying on cellular-only for home internet (smartphone hotspot or mobile plan only): ≈500–650 (about 6–8% of households), notably higher than the statewide share (generally ~3–5%). This reflects patchy wired broadband and more dependence on mobile data.
• Prepaid/mobile budget plans: Share of lines meaningfully higher than the state average (roughly high-20s percent vs. high-teens statewide), driven by income mix, credit sensitivity, and MVNO availability.

Demographic patterns behind usage

• Age: A larger 65+ share than Wisconsin overall translates to lower smartphone adoption among seniors (typically 65–75% in rural counties vs. ~80%+ statewide). Younger adults (18–34) are near-saturated smartphone users (>95%), but the older skew pulls down countywide averages.
• Income and education: Median household income trails the Wisconsin median, contributing to higher prepaid/MVNO use, slower device upgrade cycles, and more data-capped plans. This also correlates with a higher share of mobile-only home internet.
• Household composition: More dispersed, single-family rural households increase the value of wide-area coverage and signal propagation over raw speed, favoring carriers with stronger low-band footprints.

Digital infrastructure and coverage

• Carrier presence: AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon all operate in the county. MVNOs that run on these networks are widely used.
• 4G LTE: Broad along primary corridors (e.g., US-13/WI-64) and population centers (Medford and adjacent communities). Coverage thins in low-density and heavily wooded areas, producing known dead spots and variable indoor signal.
• 5G availability:
  • Low-band 5G: Reported by all three carriers in and around population centers; main benefit is coverage and reliability rather than large speed gains.
  • Mid-band 5G (e.g., n41/C-band): Present primarily in and near Medford and along the busiest road corridors; coverage is far less continuous than statewide urban corridors. As a result, everyday speeds are often LTE-like outside town centers.
• Performance expectations: Typical daytime download speeds in town centers commonly land in the tens of Mbps, with more variability and occasional single-digit speeds in fringe/ridge/forest zones. This variability is sharper than statewide norms.
• Backhaul and tower spacing: Macro sites serve large footprints; distances between sites are wider than in urban Wisconsin, contributing to capacity constraints at peak times compared with state averages.
• Fixed broadband interplay: Unserved and underserved pockets for wired broadband remain notably higher than Wisconsin’s statewide level, keeping mobile networks as a crucial fallback for home connectivity (and sustaining the county’s above-average cellular-only home internet share).

How Taylor County differs from Wisconsin overall

• Adoption: Adult smartphone adoption is several points lower than statewide because of age and rural composition; overall mobile-phone ownership is only slightly lower.
• Plan mix: Higher reliance on prepaid/MVNO plans and data-capped offerings than the state average.
• Home internet substitution: Cellular-only home internet usage is materially higher than statewide, reflecting persistent wired broadband gaps.
• Network experience: Coverage prioritizes reach over capacity; mid-band 5G is less prevalent outside Medford compared with Wisconsin’s metro corridors, so speed and indoor reliability vary more than the state norm.
• Resilience and redundancy: More residents keep legacy landlines or mixed setups than in urban Wisconsin, but the absolute level of wireless-only households is still a clear majority.

Notes on sources and estimation approach

• Population and household counts are from the 2020 Census with standard small-county adjustments to 2024 scale.
• Adoption and plan-type estimates align rural-county patterns from recent Pew Research Center smartphone adoption, CDC/NCHS wireless-only household indicators, and ACS “Computer and Internet Use” profiles, calibrated to Taylor County’s age and rural composition.
• Coverage and 5G characterizations reflect carrier-reported footprints and Wisconsin rural deployment patterns observed in 2023–2024 FCC mapping and statewide rollouts; localized performance varies by terrain and distance to sites.

Bottom line Taylor County’s mobile landscape is defined by near-universal phone ownership, slightly lower-than-state smartphone penetration, higher-than-state reliance on prepaid and cellular-only home internet, and coverage engineered for reach over capacity. Mid-band 5G remains concentrated around Medford and main corridors, so the county’s day-to-day experience diverges from Wisconsin’s metro areas, where mid-band 5G is more continuous and wired broadband substitutes reduce dependence on mobile networks.

Social media snapshot: Taylor County, Wisconsin (modeled estimates)

• Population baseline: 20,689 residents (2020 Census). Roughly 16,100 adults (18+). Adult gender split is approximately even (about half women, half men).

Most-used platforms among adults (share of U.S. adults; applied to Taylor County for local counts)

• YouTube: 83% → ~13,360 adult users
• Facebook: 68% → ~10,950
• Instagram: 47% → ~7,570
• Pinterest: 35% → ~5,640
• TikTok: 33% → ~5,310
• LinkedIn: 30% → ~4,830
• WhatsApp: 29% → ~4,670
• Snapchat: 27% → ~4,350
• X (Twitter): 22% → ~3,540
• Reddit: 22% → ~3,540 Note: These are planning-grade estimates using Pew Research Center’s 2024 U.S. adoption rates applied to the county’s adult population. Actual local usage can vary, but YouTube and Facebook are reliably the top two in rural Wisconsin. At minimum, ~83% of adults use at least one social platform (YouTube alone).

Age-group patterns (behavioral)

• Teens (13–17): Heavy Snapchat and TikTok for daily messaging/short video; Instagram for peers and sports; Facebook mostly for events from schools and clubs.
• 18–29: Multi-platform. Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube lead; Snapchat remains strong for messaging. Facebook used for jobs, rentals, events.
• 30–49: Facebook and YouTube dominate; Instagram secondary; growing TikTok consumption. Heavy use of Facebook Groups and Marketplace for local buying/selling and family activities.
• 50–64: Facebook and YouTube are primary; Pinterest strong (home, recipes, projects). Lighter use of Instagram; selective TikTok viewing.
• 65+: Facebook for community info, school updates, churches, civic groups; YouTube for tutorials, news clips, local government meeting streams.

Gender breakdown (usage tendencies)

• Overall adult split is roughly 50/50. Women over-index on Facebook and Pinterest; men over-index on YouTube and Reddit. Instagram skews slightly female; X/Twitter slightly male. Local business and community pages on Facebook tend to attract a female-majority audience; outdoor, tech, and repair content on YouTube skews male.

Local behavioral trends to expect in a rural county like Taylor

• Facebook is the community hub: school districts, fire/EMS, municipalities, churches, youth sports, and event organizers drive consistent engagement. Facebook Groups and Marketplace are high-traffic for practical needs (farm equipment, vehicles, rentals, small services).
• Video first: Short video performs best across Facebook (Reels), Instagram (Reels), TikTok, and YouTube Shorts. Practical “how-to,” seasonal, hunting/fishing, DIY, homesteading, and ag-repair content outperforms polished brand spots.
• Timing: Engagement typically peaks before work (early morning) and in the evening; weekends see strong Marketplace and events activity.
• Messaging: Facebook Messenger is the default for local businesses and community contacts; WhatsApp usage is present but lower than national urban norms.
• News and alerts: Facebook pages and Groups outperform X/Twitter for local news and weather; X/Twitter is used more by agencies and media than by residents.
• Buyer behavior: High responsiveness to limited-time offers, local sponsorships (school sports, fairs), and clear “shop local” calls-to-action. Reviews and recommendations in Groups materially influence purchases.
• Discovery: Search + social blend—residents often find businesses via Google and then validate through Facebook pages, reviews, and recent posts.

Sources and method

• Population: U.S. Census 2020 (Taylor County total population).
• Platform adoption rates: Pew Research Center, “Social Media Use in 2024.” Percentages applied to Taylor County’s adult population to yield local user estimates. Rural areas typically track close to these national adoption ranks, with Facebook and YouTube leading.