American Demographics March 2020

MARCH 2020

A Big Little Number Why life expectancy did not increase in the 2010s.

The College Crowd Trends in educational attainment The Artist in Each of Us Results from the Survey of Public Participation in the Arts Statistical Snapshots How successful are DNA test kits?

Low Wages: More Common than You Think Understanding the other end of the economic ladder What’s the Matter with Rural America?

A new study analyzes the differences between rural and urban life On the Bookshelf New books and films are putting population trends into focus

THE INFLUENCERS: Marketing Powerhouses Who Live Across the Street

“She says she is an Inf uencer and if we don’t give her money for Girl Scout cookies, she will tell everyone who follows her on Instagram.”

IN THIS ISSUE OF

MARCH 2020

PUBLISHER Phillip Russo

EDITORIAL STAFF

4 American Demographics is Back!

Brad Edmondson Cheryl Russell

5 A Big Little Number

Joe Azzinaro Sara Williamson

6 The College Crowd 7 The Artist in Each of Us 8 The Influencers 12 Low Wages:

George Puro Dane Twining Tom Prendergast

CREATIVE DIRECTOR Melissa Subatch

More Common than You Think

13 What’s the Matter with Rural America?

American Demographics and americandemographics.com

14 Statistical Snapshots for DNA Test Kits

Association, 630 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017

15 This Month’s Bookshelf

Park South, New York, N.Y. 10019. Periodicals postage

New books and films are putting population trends into focus

are owned by the Private Label Manufacturers

and licensed for publication by Kent Media, 240 Central

paid at Macedonia, OH and additional mailing offices.

All rights reserved under the Library of Congress.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system, except as may be expressly permitted in writing by the copyright owners.

MARCH 2020

A Big Little Number Why life expectancy did not increase in the 2010s.

The College Crowd Trends in educational attainment The Artist in Each of Us Results from the Survey of Public Participation in the Arts Statistical Snapshots How successful are DNA test kits?

Low Wages: More Common than You Think Understanding the other end of the economic ladder What’s the Matter with Rural America?

A new study analyzes the differences between rural and urban life On the Bookshelf New books and films are putting population trends into focus

THE INFLUENCERS: Marketing Powerhouses Who Live Across the Street

American Demographics is Back!

elcome again to American Demographics.

In this month’s issue, we turn our attention to a new 21st century phenomenon: The Influencers, who are they and how do they operate? We read a lot about the importance of social media today but here are the men and women who systematically use it to influence what we buy and what we think.

The magazine is also getting closer to its transition from print to digital delivery. Website designers are hard at work converting American Demographics from a traditional publication to a format which emphasizes video and audio as well as the printed page.

For more than 25 years, American Demographics has been the place to go for information about the trends impacting our lives. A staff of editors, reporters and experts pored through the dense governmental and academic publications in demographics, geology, gerontology, sociology and other fields to bring you insight into the diverse world around us. Soon, you will be able to see the trends for yourself.

American Demographics is back and better than ever.

to subscribe, visit: www.americandemographics.com

4

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I MARCH 2020

By Cheryl Russell

A Big Little Number Why life expectancy didn’t increase in the 2010s he number 0.1 is not very big.

It doesn’t seem like much. But in matters of life and death, it means a lot.

Life expectancy at birth in the United States increased by 0.1 year between 2017 and 2018—rising from 78.6 to 78.7 years, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. This is an increase of just one-tenth of a year, a bit more than a month. As news of the increase spread across the internet in the wee hours of the morning a few weeks ago, the nation breathed a collective sigh of relief. Or, at least the nation’s demographers did.

That’s because life expectancy at birth had fallen in two of the past eight years.

Between 2014 and 2015, life expectancy fell by 0.2 years, the first decline since 1993. It fell by another 0.1 year between 2016 and 2017. Any decline in life expectancy is a Very Big Deal, and those who track such things were bracing for another drop in 2018. Whew, disaster averted!

Even so, the tiny rise in 2018 only returns life expectancy to its 2010 level. Although the decade is not over yet, it is certain the 2010s will end with the smallest increase in life expectancy in more than a century.

Perhaps we are approaching the maximum upper limit of life expectancy and this explains our lack of progress? Hardly. Among the nations of the world, the US ranks a lowly 35th in life expectancy—about the same as Cuba and Poland, according to the United Nations. Japan has the highest life expectancy at birth—more than 84

years. Switzerland, Italy, and Spain all have life expectancies exceeding 83 years.

Why, then, has life expectancy at birth in the United States come to a standstill? A recent report by the National Center for Health Statistics answers this question, examining the contribution of various causes of death to the decline in life expectancy between 2014 and 2017 and to the small recovery between 2017 and 2018.

Most of the decline between 2014 and 2017—51 percent, to be exact—was due to the rise in deaths from unintentional injuries, a cause of death that includes such things as motor vehicle accidents, drug overdoses, and falls. Motor vehicle accidents were once the most common type of unintentional injury death. Drug overdoses surpassed them in 2013. Between 2014 and 2017, the number of drug overdose deaths soared, climbing from 47,000 to 70,000. This increase boosted unintentional injuries from the fifth to the third most important cause of death, behind only heart disease and cancer.

The tiny increase in life expectancy between 2017 and 2018 is mostly due to two factors, NCHS reports. Fewer overdose deaths explains 25 percent of the 0.1-year increase. Fewer cancer deaths explains another 30 percent of the rise. These small bits of good news are overshadowed by the larger trend: Life expectancy in the US is no longer on the rise.

LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH IN THE US AND CHANGE IN LIFE EXPECTANCY BY DECADE, 1900 TO 2018 Life expectancy at birth

Change over decade

2018

78.7 YEARS

0.0 YEARS

2010

78.7

1.9

2000

76.8

1.4

1990

75.4

1.7

1980

73.7

2.9

1970

70.8

1.1

1960

69.7

1.5

1950

68.2

5.3

1940

62.9

3.2

1930

59.7

5.6

1920

54.1

4.1

1910

50.0

2.7

1900

47.3

—

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Mortality Data, United States Life Tables,

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I MARCH 2020 5

The College Crowd

Trends in educational attainment ducational

has

enroll in higher education. Only 40 percent

never been higher. More than

attainment

of women aged 25 to 34 had at least some

one in three adults aged 25 or

college experience in 1978.

older (35 percent) had a bachelor’s degree in 2018, according to the US Census Bureau. Fifty years ago in 1968, just 10 percent of Americans were college graduates.

Millennials

67%

Gen X

63%

Baby-Boomers

59%

Older Americans 48%

to college for at least one year. Women are slightly ahead of men in graduating from college as well, with 35.3 percent of women and 34.6 percent of men having a bachelor’s

an experience that shapes attitudes and

degree.

people aged 25 or older had any college experience in 1968. Now going to college is the norm, with 61 percent of adults having at least some college experience. The figure topped 50 percent for the first time fairly recently—in 1999. No wonder American society has changed so much and so fast. More change is on the way.

baby-boom generation, the first in which the majority has college experience. Fifty-nine percent of boomers have one or more years

These numbers will continue to rise. Educated parents want educated children. Among parents with a student in grades 6 through 12, two out of three expect their child to earn at least a bachelor’s degree, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

Among parents with a bachelor’s degree, the figure is an even higher 84 percent.

Educational attainment will continue to rise for another reason as well: bang for the buck.

Most college graduates regard the investment as worthwhile, despite the rise in student debt. Among college-educated adults

Millennials

40%

Gen X

37%

67 percent of millennials.

Baby-Boomers

32%

Behind the boomer rush to college in the

76 percent say the lifetime financial benefits

Older Americans 25%

1960s was the Vietnam war, driving young

of a bachelor’s degree exceed the costs, ac-

men to enroll in school to avoid the draft. By

cording to a survey by the Federal Reserve

1978, half of men aged 25 to 34 had college

Board. Even among college graduates under

experience. Women did not face the threat

age 30—the people now burdened with stu-

of the draft, faced lesser expectations for

dent loans—the majority (52 percent) say

educational attainment in general for family

college was worth the cost.

Source: US Census Bureau Note: In 2018, millennials were 25 to 41; Gen Xers were 42 to 53; boomers were 54 to 72; older Americans were 73 or older.

of college, as do 63 percent of Gen Xers and

life and the workplace, and so were slower to

6

women and 60 percent of men had been

important, is the rise in going to college—

Going to college became the norm with the Percent with a bachelor’s degree by generation, 2018

cational attainment. In 2018, 63 percent of

Equally dramatic, and perhaps even more

lifestyles for a lifetime. Only 20 percent of Percent with at least some college by generation, 2018

Women eventually surpassed men in edu-

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I MARCH 2020

aged 40 to 59—the people now paying for their own children to go to college—64 to

The Artist in Each of Us

Results from the Survey of Public Participation in the Arts ost Americans create art, but few

Not surprisingly, young adults are most likely

are paid for their creations. In a na-

to make art. Two out of three adults under age

tion with 164 million workers, only

35 created art in the past year. Some of these

2.5 million are working artists—

amateurs will turn into professionals in the

meaning their art earns them a paycheck.

Chances are, you aren’t one of them. But that doesn’t mean you’re not an artist. In fact, you probably are. 54 percent of Americans aged 18 or older created art in the past 12 months, according to the 2017 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts, funded by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). That’s 133 million people singing, dancing, painting, sculpting, acting, and directing—just for the fun of it.

The 2.5 million working artists include designers, architects, art directors, fine artists, writers, photographers, musicians, producers, directors, actors, dancers, choreographers, and even announcers. Most of these artists are employed full-time, and those who are earned a median of $52,800, according to the NEA’s analysis of the US Census Bureau’s 2012-16 American Community Survey. The earnings of

years ahead. Keep your eye on them.

Women are more likely than men to make art—57 percent of women vs. 50 percent of men. Education is also linked to artmaking.

Fully 65 percent of college graduates created art in the past year compared with a smaller 45 percent of those with no more than a high

Singing and dancing are the two most popular arts. Twenty-five percent of adults participated in singing and 24 percent in dancing in the past 12 months. Photography is third (14 percent participated), followed by painting/drawing/ sculpting/printmaking (13 percent), sewing

performing arts (singing, dancing, etc.) did so

artists are not exactly starving.

in a private home. Are these efforts at sing-

(62 percent) and to feel creatively inspired (47 percent).

Aged 35 to 44

50%

Aged 45 to 54

51%

Aged 55 to 64

49%

Aged 65 to 74

55%

Aged 75-plus

37%

Source: NEA, 2017 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts

ics/jewelry, and 2 percent were on stage.

ly 63 percent of adults who engaged in the

art is to spend time with family and friends

65%

ative writing, 4 percent made pottery/ceram-

an for the average worker ($44,640). Working

The two biggest reasons cited for creating

Aged 25 to 34

(11 percent). Seven percent participated in cre-

Quite a bit of artmaking is done at home. Ful-

they seem to think art makes life worth living.

65%

(12 percent), and playing a musical instrument

al workers ($60,460) but more than the medi-

While they don’t make a living from their art,

Aged 18 to 24

school diploma.

artists are below the median for all profession-

But what of the 133 million amateur artists?

Percent of adults who created art the past 12 months

ing nothing more than shower solos? Hard to say. The survey question is, “During the last 12 months did you do any singing?” Those who said yes likely range from shower singers to serious performers. When the singers were asked whether they sang with a choir, chorus, or band, only 30 percent said yes.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I MARCH 2020 7

BY JOE AZZINARO

The Influencers: Marketing Powerhouses Who Live Across the Street Oprah Winfrey may be a great example of an influencer. So is my cousin who blogs about college basketball. Then there’s my neighbor across the street. She gives advice to thousands of people about what clothes to wear and what food to eat. All of them—famous or ordinary—share a unique 21st Century role. They are Influencers and they try to get the rest of us to do what they want us to do. That’s using demographics at its most basic.

In some ways, it is as old as society itself. But today it is big business with thousands of players, hundreds of product niches and scores of platforms. And most influencers are far from being Oprah-level celebrities. Rather than relying on the silver screen or a gift of free goods, today’s influencers are turbo charged by social media. And they can be anyone. Even anonymous. A marketing powerhouse who lives across the street.

What is an influencer?

“Influencer” is now officially recognized as a word, having entered the Merriam-Webster dictionary of the English language in 2019. “It’s an individual who has the power to affect purchase decisions of others because of his/her authority, knowledge, position or relationship with his/her audience,” explains Influencer Marketing Hub, a resource for brands and 8

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I MARCH 2020

agencies. “An individual who has a following in a niche, which they actively engage with. The size of the following depends on the size of the niche. These individuals are not simply marketing tools, but rather social relationship assets with which brands collaborate to achieve marketing objectives.”

Adds Sarah Donawerth, of notification, an influencer website, “Influencer marketing is the process of using external content creators to advocate and engage with your brand’s message.

They present content to their audience, increase their brand awareness and help to convert them into customers. Digital influencers are trendsetters and taste-makers, with consumers looking for their recommendations to guide purchasing decisions.”

Types of marketing that leverage influencers may involve, as Donawerth explains, one or more of the following: product reviews on social media; unboxing videos; product placements within creative content; sharing a brand’s campaigns and product launches; sharing a coupon code so an influencer’s audience gets a deal; creating a co-branded product or campaign; offering giveaways on an influencer’s platforms; supporting influencers’ causes by donating products to fundraisers; and building content, such as videos, blog posts, and social media ads.

Dollars are flooding into the space.

Brands will spend up to $15 billion on influencers by 2022, up from $8 billion in 2019, says Business Insider Intelligence, per Mediakix data. Every social platform attracts influencers, but Instagram is currently the gold standard. Fully 79% of brands use Instagram for campaigns, as compared to Facebook (46%), YouTube (36%), Twitter (24%), and LinkedIn (12%), says Influencer Marketing Hub. The majority of operatives fit into four categories, with the last rapidly becoming the most important, says Donawerth: celebrities; industry experts and thought leaders; bloggers and content creators; and micro- and nano-influencers (those with 10,000-50,000 followers and 1,00010,000 followers, respectively).

The bulk of influencer marketing occurs in social media, predominantly with micro-influencers. They have the most authentic and active relationships with fans. Sarah Spellings, of New York Magazine, describes them as “endless wells of drama because they live their lives publicly and ostentatiously.” They are everyday people who have deep knowledge about a product niche and a sizable following. It’s possible that a micro-influencer is not aware of the existence of a brand before it reaches out to them. The brand must convince the influencer of its worth. Micro-influencers don’t want to harm their relationship with fans if they promote a lemon. Some are happy to promote a brand for free, while others expect payment.

Millions of followers, views, dollars Even among hugely influential influencers, most are decidedly not household names. Have you heard of Nikkie de Jager or James Charles? Cosmetic companies have. Each has 15 million Instagram followers who monitor their makeup tips, and marketers know very well the impact a good or bad review can have on their sales. On YouTube, you can find influencers who make tens of millions of dollars a year. VanossGaming and Markiplier are YouTubers in their 20s with roughly 25 million subscribers each, who upload their video gameplay and review new video game releases online. They earn about $17 million a year for their expertise and the millions of eyeballs they reach.

Among the most successful YouTubers is an 8-year-old named Ryan. Ryan’s World has over 23 million followers on YouTube and he earns $23 million a year. He plays with toys and reviews them for his audience, who are kids and their parents. His videos can generate hundreds of millions of views within a day or two of posting them. His most popular has 1.9 billion. As a result, the Ryan’s World brand has been licensed to new lines of toys for sale on Amazon, at Walmart and Target.

Five years ago at age 15 Ava Jules started giving opinions on health and beauty products and soon gained 580,000 YouTube subscribers. It’s now up over a million, plus an additional 577,000 followers on Instagram. Rachel Claire Levin runs one of the fastest growing YouTube influencer channels, called Rclbeauty101. Serving advice for regular people on beauty, clothing and lifestyle, she has garnered more than 14 million followers and 3 billion views. Makeup artist Huda Kattan has 27 million followers for her Huda Beauty YouTube channel and receives $33,000 per post. Recent Texas A&M grad Brittany (Tomlinson) Broski was dubbed “Kombucha girl” after a video of her trying the drink last year was viewed by 40 million on TikTok, a viral app taking over teen’s phones across the world.

Then she was working in a bank. She now has 2.3 million followers on the platform, which has 27 million monthly US users, 60% of them ages 16 to 24.

The most successful of these influencers earn hundreds of thousands of dollars per post, says Wired. For a simple photo with a product, rates for an influencer with a million Instagram followers start at $10,000. Sponsored video content is more expensive. YouTubers with 3 million subscribers charge at least $40,000 per video, while negative reviews of a competitor’s product fetch double that.

Celebrities of course were the original influencers, but their importance for product endorsements is waning. They may lack credibility with a product’s target audience, and it’s debatable how much influence they really hold over their fans.

In their place, influencer types have proliferated, filling every niche. In addition to the Avas, Rachels, Hudas, and Brittanys, brands are turning to kid-fluencers, gaming influencers, and virtual or computer-generated influencers, among others, reports Audrey Schomer, of Business Insider.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I MARCH 2020 9

Some 20% of consumers have purchased a product because of an influencer or blogger while 10% have because of a celebrity, says market researcher CivicScience, a “difference that highlights the turn brands might be taking towards lesser-known influencers and bloggers who may be more relatable than a celebrity.”

Among consumers under 25 years of age, 36% have purchased a product because of an influencer/blogger and 19% have because of a celebrity.

Organic influencers are especially prized “The future is organic influencers,” says Megan DeGruttola, of Social Media Today, pointing out that these are real people who already buy the products in question and create content about the marketer’s brand. “They’re genuine brand advocates.

They may have 5,000 Instagram followers, or they may have 50, but the size of their following isn’t as important as their passion, authenticity and influence.” By re-imagining their programs with organic influencers, marketers bypass the risk of mistrust that a majority of consumers feel towards paid influencers, while building communities and libraries of visuals that move the needle for their brands.

“Content is earned, not paid,” she continues, “so you never lose the authenticity factor.” By inviting these influencers into an organic community, marketers not only cultivate a 1:1 connection but open the lines of communication to guide the content that these advocates post about their brands. For too long, marketing has focused on the wrong influencers. Millennials and Gen Zers prioritize authenticity when choosing brands, and their trust in traditional influencers is at an all-time low.”

So, how do companies with something to sell go about identifying the right influencers for their product or service? Izea, the first platform to pay bloggers to create content for brands, advises marketers “it’s important to develop relationships early on and make compelling arguments for why an influencer should work with your brand. There are ways to make the right connection. Research first. Find common ground. Follow them on social media. Establish mutual benefits. And don’t be a

10

nuisance. Influencers are busy. Be direct, make your proposal, accept the response.

If an influencer doesn’t have availability, move on.”

Among other factors to be considered, a company must think about when to engage influencers. Researching, building a rapport, and negotiating contracts often takes time. Where the audience is located is another consideration. If it’s primarily on Instagram, those influencers will have greater clout than operatives on other platforms, so companies may use customer data to narrows the search for the platforms their audience favors.

“Influencer marketing produces a fuzzy ROI” But not everything is rosy. Influencers’ efficacy is increasingly being questioned. “Finding a return on investment remains a challenge,” warns Retail Wire.

“Influencer marketing produces a fuzzy ROI. Another problem is verifying the authenticity of influencers and their followers and finding relevant influencers for campaigns. Like other advertising, measuring an influencer’s value is made more difficult by a lack of a direct link to purchases.”

A SocialPubli.com survey placed greater importance on engagement than on the traditional metric of reach when measuring success. Also valued were increases in

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I MARCH 2020

website traffic, sales and lead generation.

Emphasis on engagement shows marketers are focusing on quality over quantity.

Brands are looking for influencers who drive genuine conversations.

Analytics platform Talkwalker is bullish on influencer marketing, although it concedes that measuring ROI is a major issue.

A focus on authenticity over appearance and greater focus on quality is growing.

Brittany McKone, of Weber Shandwick cautions marketers “You can’t just pick an influencer you like and hope for the best.”

When the influencer posts, a company will want to look at all the ways their followers interact with it. “Engagement is the best metric,” says Donaweth. “It’s the primary measure of success. Engagement determines how many people are actually paying attention... Impressions on a post could show how many people saw it, but engagement indicates how many people are receptive to the message. These people are likely to convert if given the proper nurturing.” Likes, comments, and interactions all contribute to engagement totals for a given post.

Site traffic can also be a goal of those seeking to build their marketing efforts using influencers. It’s easy to track and can eventually lead to conversions. It can help marketers amass leads, if the site is set up to capture users information.

Email signups, abandoned cart efforts, and other marketing on the site can help to move these leads further down the funnel.

Google Analytics or Shopify Analytics, can be used to identify spikes in traffic.

Complicating ROI calculation is Instagram’s threat to hide “likes,” which some see as a death knell for the industry. “Likes are the currency undergirding the influencer economy,” says Amy Chozik, of The New York Times. “Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, has been concerned about the unanticipated consequences of the platform as approval arbiter. But making likes private will be a major shift for its one billion users, for whom daily assessment of one another’s popularity is like breathing.” Others see it as an opportunity to devalue the “like” and focus on engagement rate, conversions and website traffic, explains Katie Richards, of Glossy.

Another hurdle: The government is cracking down on influencer relationships. “A lack of disclosure in content, faulty agreements, unmarked sponsorships and misleading ads have become a problem,” says Jeremy Haile, in Forbes. “Regulations must reflect growing requirements for social media partnerships.” In November, the FTC issued guidelines—Disclosures 101 for Social Media Influencers—which provide tips for how influencers should tell followers about their relationship with a brand.

Haile, CEO of Sideqik, summarizes the guidelines: Interactions are endorsements; disclosure language is important, but subjective; disclosures must be superimposed, and hashtag disclosures are not necessary.

“The FTC is pushing for more transparent relationships between brands, influencers and consumers. Instead of hindering influencers, these guidelines ensure they will properly communicate with their audiences, pushing the industry into an age of honesty.”

Big influencers on campus, and at the supermarket Influencers are increasingly being used by colleges. Eric Stoller, vice president of higher education chat-bot provider GeckoEngage, says students have “power on campus that they didn’t hold before because they can now reach audiences at any time, any place. They can be campus celebrities on par with athletes. Institutions are des-

perate to differentiate themselves and students tell stories about campus life in ways institutions cannot.”

Adds Lindsay McKenzie, of Inside Higher Ed: “When teenagers are looking for information about what it’s like to go to a college, they rarely consult college brochures or websites.

Instead, they turn to social media. “I remember going to the library for books with summaries of what college life was like,” offers Brian Freeman, CEO, Heartbeat, which connects brands with influencers. “I don’t see a 16-year old doing that now,” he said. “They go to the hashtag or location of a school on Instagram and look at the feed to get a feel for the atmosphere.”

Enjoyable grocery store experiences are worth telling the world about, and fans are bringing enthusiasm to social media and without financial support from retailers. Shoppers with their own pages are a dream scenario for chains, claims Evan Asano, of Mediakix. “Earned media is the best type... The posts come from ‘love of the brand.” Kroger, Whole Foods, Aldi, Trader Joe’s and Costco all have unaffiliated “everyday influencers” on standalone blog sites, YouTube, Facebook or Instagram, reports CNN. While some chains enjoy the free viral marketing, some have strategies to leverage the social presence.

Katie Cooksey, who runs Kroger Krazy, a Facebook page with nearly 600,000 followers, said Kroger sends her its weekly advertising early and invites her to special events. “My readers feel a sense of community,” she says. “They are engaging on almost everything I post.” Kroger has started “Kroger Collective,” which works with fans to create content like recipes highlighting Kroger’s products.

After Tabitha Brown posted a video of her reaction to a vegan BLT at Whole Foods that went viral, the chain partnered with her to launch the sandwich in all their stores for a month. Diane Youngpeter is a Detroit stay-at-home mom who runs Aldi Nerd, a blog about the chain. She also has an Aldi fan group on Facebook with half a million members.

Trader Joe’s has spawned a cottage industry of influencers. There are now about a dozen Instagram accounts—some of

which generate big money—devoted to the store’s products, reports Rebecca Jennings, of Vox. The biggest, Trader Joe’s List, has a million followers. Jen Coleman and Laura Wiertzema started their Instagram page, Costco-does-it-again, after success with a similar Target handle. “A lot of people don’t know how to navigate the store the way they do. We are the ultimate consumers.”

“The ways in which consumers have been approached by grocery retailers is losing relevancy,” offers Melissa Abbott, the Hartman Group. “Consumers are responding to influencers who are honest, raw and vulnerable.”

Influencer trends for 2020 Danielle Wiley, CEO, Sway Group, an influencer agency, offers 2020 predictions: Instagram reigns supreme (grows to 113 million US-based users this year), TikTok is on the rise; metrics will be more important; influencer size gets smaller for bigger results; influencers get more “real” with content; and marketers combine different strategies for greater impact. “Fit over followers” is the mantra in “the year of the nano-influencer.”

PRWeek suggests: Tighter regulations, transparency on performance, costs, reporting; delegitimize so-called experts with no knowledge, ROI needs to be stronger, influencers more client-focused and stop portraying their lives as “normal,” sets unrealistic expectations for young people; and demonstrate how authentic content affects bottom line.

“Instagram remains the preferred platform but TikTok takes share. Influencers will develop their own businesses,” foresees Tom Ward, in Forbes. “Many are tired of driving sales for others, they’re looking to grow their own brands, moving beyond merchandise to revenue. There will be more high-profile ad campaigns featuring influencers. It wouldn’t surprise me to see them in a Super Bowl commercial in a few years.” But one wonders whether cultivated, commercialized authenticity will ever be able to take the place of celebrity spokespersons, cute puppies and special effects wizardry.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I MARCH 2020 11

Low Wages: More Common than You Think Understanding the other end of the economic ladder ow many low-wage workers are there in the

defines the low-wage workforce to better grasp its dimen-

United States? The answer might shock you,

sions (See the Brookings report, Meet the Low Wage Work-

especially if you’ve grown complacent be-

force). The upper limit of the low-wage threshold, as defined

cause few workers earn the minimum wage

by Brookings, is earnings of no more than two-thirds of the

anymore. But as you will see, the minimum wage is just

median wage of men who work full-time, year-round. Na-

a starting point for estimating the size of the low-wage

tionally, that’s an average of $16.03 per hour. But Brookings

work force.

goes further and adjusts the low-wage threshold for the cost

The starting point, the federal minimum wage, is $7.25 per hour, a level set more than a decade ago in 2009. In all these years, the federal minimum wage has not been increased to adjust for inflation. But don’t worry. In 2019, only 1.6 million of the nation’s 82 million workers paid by the hour earned minimum wage or less, according to the Bureau of Labor

data from the US Census Bureau’s 2012-2016 American Community Survey. After adjusting for cost of living, the low wage threshold ranges from a low of $12.54 per hour in Beckley, West Virginia, to a high of $20.02 per hour in San Jose, California.

Statistics. Few workers earn minimum wage because, over

Brookings finds that the low-wage workforce is much larg-

the past decade, many states have raised the minimum

er than anyone would have guessed. Fully 53 million work-

above the federal level to improve the lives of their residents.

ers—44 percent of all workers aged 18 to 64—earn low wag-

Most states today have a higher minimum than the federal

es. Among these workers, the median hourly wage is $10.22

minimum wage.

per hour. Median annual earnings are $17,950. While you

If you earned minimum wage and worked 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, your annual earnings would be just $15,080.

This is above the poverty threshold for a single-person

might quibble with Brookings’ definition of a low-wage worker, it is hard to argue that median annual earnings of $17,950 are anything but low.

household ($13,300 in 2019), but below the poverty thresh-

“It would be comforting if most low-wage workers were

old for a two-person household ($17,120), according to the

teenagers, people working for personal fulfillment or extra

Census Bureau. Minimum-wage workers are the lowest of

spending money,” Brookings notes. Unfortunately, many of

low-wage workers.

them are not in these situations. Instead, they are trapped

Who are the others? Let’s expand the definition of low wages and include all those between the ages of 18 and 64 who earn significantly less than the median wage of full-time, year-round workers. This is how the Brookings Institution 12

of living in each of the nation’s metropolitan areas using

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I MARCH 2020

in low-wage work and barely able to make ends meet. “Between one-third to more than one-half of all low-wage workers—representing 16 to 27 million people—are in trouble,” concludes Brookings.

What’s the Matter with Rural America?

A new study analyzes the differences between rural and urban life he troubles of rural America are many. The

by cultural difference.” The personalities of people who

annual report by the USDA’s Economic Re-

live in or move to urban areas are different from the per-

search Service, Rural America at a Glance,

sonalities of people who choose to stay in rural areas, and

describes some of them: population loss,

increasingly so.

slow job growth, low incomes, high poverty rates, and declining labor force participation. Not mentioned in the report but equally troubling is the greater prevalence of opioid addiction in rural areas and the decline in life expectancy.

But that’s not the only problem, says Wilkinson. The “small-state bias” of our electoral system has exacerbated the rural-urban divide. Those high in openness tend to be more liberal and Democratic. Those low in openness tend to be more conservative and Republican. “Under the

No one has been able to explain why rural America

conditions of the density divide,” Wilkinson concludes,

has these problems, nor why the problems are getting

“the constitutionally baked-in overrepresentation of

worse. Until now, that is. A study by Will Wilkinson, vice

sparsely populated states lends Republicans an enor-

president for research at the Niskanen Center (The

mous structural advantage, and as America’s population

Density Divide: Urbanization, Polarization, and Popu-

continues to concentrate in highly urbanized states, this

list Backlash), offers an intriguing theory, backed by

bias grows worse.”

psychological research. Over the years, argues Wilkinson, ongoing urbanization has “sorted and segregated national populations” by personality type. Wilkinson’s analysis presents research showing how personality type varies by population density, all because of selec-

Is there a way out of this mess? A recent report by the Brookings Institution (The Case for Growth Centers: How

to Spread Tech Innovation across America) offers a way out: federal intervention.

tive migration. This, he says, not only explains the ru-

“The nation needs…a massive federal effort to transform

ral-urban divide but also why it is growing.

a short list of ‘heartland’ metro areas with compelling

Urban areas are increasingly home to people who score higher on the “openness to experience” personality domain, Wilkinson says. “People high in openness seek novelty, like to travel, are interested in other cultures, try new foods, are motivated to learn, and are relatively comfortable with ethnic and cultural difference,” he explains.

Population density and openness to experience are highly correlated. That’s because those higher in openness are more likely to move to urban areas. As urban areas accumulate people higher in openness, rural areas are increasingly populated by those who are less open. “Those

strengths into self-sustaining ‘growth centers’ that will benefit entire regions,” argues Brookings. To spread the wealth and narrow the divide, the report offers a long list of potential growth centers. Among the top 10 are Madison, Wisconsin; Lexington, Kentucky; Rochester, New York; Tucson, Pittsburgh, and Salt Lake City. “We envision Congress establishing a rigorous competitive process by which the most promising eight to 10 potential growth centers would receive substantial financial and regulatory support for 10 years to get ‘over the hump’ and become self-sustaining new innovation centers.”

low in openness are wary of change and more likely to

It might be doable, if only we could bridge the divide and

hew to tradition, remain close to home, and feel unsettled

agree to get it done.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I MARCH 2020 13

By Sara Williamson PhD.

Statistical Snapshots Ever Wonder How Successful DNA Home Kits Really Are? long-lost uncle in Tanzania? A cousin nobody ever knew existed in Norway? You hear the stories all the time. A DNA test uncovered family roots that changed our lives. We wondered how successful DNA home kits really are so we asked a sample of nearly 700

3 out of 10 said that they learned new health and medical information about themselves.

73%

50%

Nearly 50% discovered a family member that they were unaware of.

matches their results to others in the database.

men and women who have used DNA home kits and here’s what we found:

are now registered on a website that

81%

said that the DNA kit was a positive experience.

Who was in the sample? It was 47% male and 52%

42%

found a living family member that they did not know about.

female. Median age was 37. Median income was $50,000-$59,000. The survey was conducted online by Profilic survey recruitment platform. A total

30%

have actually connected with family members as a result of using a DNA kit.

Among those who found a living family member that they were unaware of,

14

40%

felt that the experience changed the way they perceive themselves

26%

said the experience has changed their way of life.

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS I MARCH 2020

of 3,630 men and women were screened to arrive at 679 participants who had personal use of a DNA home kit.

which means “to assess.” They also reported perhaps the first recorded census joke told of a Roman census-taker who asked a citizen if he had a wife, who replied “I indeed have a wife, but not, by Heaven! such a one as I could desire.”

20 years, would soon outnumber their counterparts in England.

Even before that, the earliest examples of censuses come not from the continent’s new European inhabitants but from the native population.

When the Powhatan confederacy sent a delegation to London led by Pocahantas, the delegation included Uttamatomakkin, who was sent to size up the English.

They proved to be too many to count and he gave up, but not before getting enough intel about the imposing size of the threat.

Further south, the Incas of South America, who did not have a formal writing system, are believed to have counted their people through elaborate bundles of knotted colored strings, called khipu.

The Sum of the People This year’s US Census follows in the footsteps of a rich history, whose origins go back much further than the founding days of the country.

The Sum of the People, a new book by economist and data scientist Andrew Whitby, is an engaging collection of stories of how the act of counting people has evolved over more than 3,000 years across numerous cultures, finally arriving at the Census we have today—what is often called the “largest peacetime mobilization in American history.” The book is written in an accessible style, achieving the author’s goal “to sketch the global history for a nonexpert reader.”

One of the earliest examples of a census comes from China’s Yellow River Valley from around 2100 BCE. The legendary Yu the Great was purported to have counted the people, coming up with 13,553,923, though the author says this number was surely a “later embellishment.” Whitby similarly questions the accuracy of the tallies in the Book of Numbers, where the Israelites were commanded to count all of the men ages 20 and over as preparation for the battles that were to come as the people entered the Promised Land.

The Greeks were similarly enamored with the census. Plato believed that the ideal city-state should have 5,040 male heads of household, a perfectly divisible number for social organization.

The Romans introduced the word census, which comes from the Latin cēnsēre,

Whitby says that this joke is certainly a precursor to other whimsical answers in censuses (or perhaps, answers in protest), including the 2001 worldwide Internet-fueled phenomenon of people answering “Jedi” when asked their religion on census forms. Over 70,000 Australians, 21,000 Canadians and 53,000 New Zealanders claimed to be from the Jedi order that year. In England and Wales, there were 390,127 Jedis (0.7% of the population), making it the fourth-largest religion there.

Over in America, the census was mandated by the United States Constitution, drafted in 1787, with a specific plan for how the population would be counted and how often.

But the act of counting population was well-entrenched in American society before that. In fact, the author notes, it was more established in colonial America than it was in Europe. Censuses were common in most of the colonies throughout the 18th century. Benjamin Franklin himself was a big proponent of them. He predicted that the American people, who were marrying earlier and having more babies, and whose population was doubling every

Some of the most significant developments in the modern census were influenced by developments in the US Census. For example, notions of the importance of a person’s privacy and confidentiality began to emerge in the 19th century. By 1850, the census ceased its former practice of posting census schedules in each town so the population could check for errors.

But the most significant innovation came before the 1890 census, for which Herman Hollerith invented the Hollerith Electric Tabulating Machine. The 1880 census had been so challenging to tabulate by hand that the census needed to find a solution. Hollerith’s machine, which utilized punch cards, shaved off two years of tabulation time and saved the government $5 million.

Whitby tells readers about other ways people have been counted, including stories from World War II, efforts by the United Nations to count the world, and the first post-apartheid census in South Africa.

The book ends with a discussion of the current census—how it is projected to cost the US about $16 billion, or $48 for each of its approximately 330 million citizens. Some argue that with the amount of data collected about people today, censuses are doomed to become obsolete. But instead, the author suggests that censuses may indeed become “an alternative to constant, invasive surveillance.”

AMERICANDEMOGRAPHICS.COM I MARCH 2020 15

Month by Month at a Glance

AMERICAN DEMOGRAPHICS Who Are “The Influencers?”

(March)

Welcome to the World of Labor Shortages (February)

Census Day and Counting (April)

Gen Z: Listening to the Footsteps (Winter)

The Mystery of Algorithms (May)

Let American Demographics be your umbrella against the uncertainties of tomorrow’s raindrops.

Visit www.americandemographics.com and subscribe.