Learn Hardcore Spanish (Latin America): Dicen que una prensa libre ayuda a que todas las personas, sin importar a quién amen, puedan vivir con más respeto. - They say that a free press helps all people, no matter whom they love, to live with more respect.

In Dicen que, the subject is an unspecified “they”. Spanish often uses the 3rd person plural without saying who they are, to mean “people” in general.

So:

Dicen que… ≈ “They say that…” / “People say that…”
The subject (ellos, “they”) is understood but omitted, which is very natural in Spanish.
It’s a common way to introduce a general opinion, rumor, or widely held belief.

You could also say La gente dice que… (“People say that…”) but Dicen que… is shorter and very idiomatic.

Could I say Se dice que instead of Dicen que? Is there any difference?

Yes, you could say:

Dicen que una prensa libre…
Se dice que una prensa libre…

Both mean roughly “It is said that a free press…” or “People say that a free press…”

Differences in nuance:

Dicen que…
- Slightly more informal / conversational.
- Feels like “they say that…”, maybe echoing what people are saying around you.
Se dice que…
- More impersonal and often more formal or “written”.
- Feels like “it is said that…”, like a general, somewhat objective statement.

Grammatically, both are correct here.

Why is it una prensa libre and not la prensa libre?

Prensa means “press / news media” and is feminine singular, so you must use una / la.

una prensa libre ≈ “a free press” (one possible type of press; speaking generally)
la prensa libre ≈ “the free press” (a more specific or already mentioned idea)

In Spanish, to talk about something in a general, non-specific way, you can use una like in English:

Una democracia fuerte necesita una prensa libre.
“A strong democracy needs a free press.”

Using la prensa libre here would sound more like you’re referring to a known, specific entity (“the free press” that exists in a certain place), rather than the idea of free press in general.

Why do we say prensa and not something like los medios?

Prensa literally means “press” (newspapers, journalists, news media; originally print), while los medios means “the media” in a broader sense (TV, radio, internet, etc.).

una prensa libre focuses specifically on journalistic press.
los medios (or los medios de comunicación) is wider.

You could say:

Dicen que unos medios libres ayudan…

but prensa libre is a very fixed, common collocation in Spanish, especially in political or social discussions.

Why is it ayuda a que and not just ayuda que or ayuda a vivir?

Ayudar has two common patterns:

ayudar a + infinitive
- La prensa libre ayuda a vivir con más respeto.
- “The free press helps (people) to live with more respect.”
- Same subject or an implied general subject.
ayudar a que + subjunctive
- Una prensa libre ayuda a que todas las personas… puedan vivir…
- “A free press helps (to bring it about) that all people can live…”

ayudar a que + subjunctive is used when:

there is a different, explicit subject in the next clause (todas las personas),
and you want to emphasize the result or effect that something helps to make possible, not something that is already fully realized.

So:

ayuda a vivir – helps to live (directly with an infinitive)
ayuda a que… puedan vivir – helps so that they can live; helps to make it possible for them to live

Why is puedan in the subjunctive and not pueden?

Puedan is subjunctive (present subjunctive of poder).

We use the subjunctive puedan here because:

It follows the structure ayudar a que + subjunctive, which typically describes an intended / possible result, not a guaranteed fact.
The idea is: “A free press helps so that people can live with more respect” – this is about what a free press tends to make possible, not an automatic, observed reality in every case.

If you said:

…ayuda a que todas las personas… pueden vivir con más respeto.

it would sound incorrect to native speakers; ayudar a que practically requires the subjunctive (puedan) in this usage.

In sin importar a quién amen, what does sin importar mean and how does this structure work?

Sin importar literally means “without (it) mattering”, and it’s often used as a fixed expression meaning “regardless of / no matter”.

Structure:

sin importar + indirect question (with quién, cómo, dónde, etc.)

In your sentence:

sin importar a quién amen ≈ “regardless of whom they love” / “no matter who they love”.

More examples:

Sin importar cuánto cueste, lo vamos a hacer.
“No matter how much it costs, we’re going to do it.”
Sin importar dónde vivas, tienes derechos.
“No matter where you live, you have rights.”

So sin importar sets up a condition that does not change the main statement (here: that they can live with more respect).

Why is it a quién and not just quién?

The a is required because of the verb amar:

In Spanish, when you love a person, you almost always use amar a alguien.
- Amar a alguien – to love someone
- Quiero a mi familia. – I love my family.

In a quién amen, quién is the direct object, and Spanish keeps the personal a:

amar a quién – to love whom

So:

a quién amen ≈ “whom they love”
(literally: “to whom they love”)

If you dropped the a (“quién amen”), it would sound wrong to native speakers because amar with a person as object normally needs that a.

Why does quién have an accent mark here?

Quién with an accent (quién / quiénes) is used in:

direct questions:
¿Quién viene? – Who is coming?
indirect / embedded questions:
No sé quién viene. – I don’t know who is coming.

In sin importar a quién amen, we have an indirect question (embedded in a larger structure):

“regardless of who(m) they love”

So quién must have the accent.

Without the accent (quien), it’s usually a relative pronoun meaning “who / that”, as in:

La persona quien habló (rare; more common: la persona que habló)

Why is amen also in the subjunctive and not aman?

Amen (from amar) is in the present subjunctive, and it’s triggered by the expression sin importar plus an indirect question:

sin importar a quién amen – “no matter whom they love”

This is similar to English expressions like:

“whoever they may love”
“whomever they might love”

We use the subjunctive because:

The people they love are unspecified / variable / hypothetical.
We’re talking about a general condition, not a specific fact.

If you said:

sin importar a quién aman

it would sound odd; it would feel too concrete, as if you were talking about some very specific, known people they currently love. The idiomatic pattern is sin importar + subjunctive in this kind of “no matter who/what/where” meaning.

What is the subject of puedan vivir in this sentence?

The subject of puedan vivir is:

todas las personas – “all people”

So structurally:

…ayuda a que todas las personas… puedan vivir con más respeto.

Subject → todas las personas
Verb → puedan vivir

That’s why puedan is in the 3rd person plural (they).

Why is it todas las personas and not something like todo el mundo or toda la gente?

All three are possible in different contexts:

todas las personas – all people (more formal / neutral, inclusive, human-rights tone)
todo el mundo – everybody (very colloquial / conversational)
toda la gente – all the people / everyone (also fairly colloquial)

Here, the sentence is talking about rights, respect, and a free press, which is a bit more formal and universal, so todas las personas sounds very appropriate and standard.

You could say:

…ayuda a que todo el mundo pueda vivir con más respeto.

and it would be understandable and natural in spoken language, but slightly less formal.

Why do we say vivir con más respeto and not vivir en más respeto or something like vivir más respetuosamente?

In Spanish, the idea of “with respect” is usually expressed with con + noun, not with an adverb:

vivir con respeto – to live with respect
tratar a alguien con respeto – to treat someone with respect

So:

vivir con más respeto – to live with more respect

Using en (vivir en más respeto) is not idiomatic here.

You could say:

vivir de manera más respetuosa
vivir de forma más respetuosa

but these are longer and more formal. Vivir con más respeto is short, natural, and very common.