It sounds like Marko accepted the award, but spoke against it at the ceremony, and then returned it later, around the time he published his thoughts on line. Does this seem like the correct chain of events?

Rivaud: The ceremony took place January 26, 2007, in Grenoble, France.  Marko accepted the invitation to come because he enjoys these events where it is possible to speak about and exchange stories about mountaineering. One of his motivations also was to get out his message about the dangers of a competition. We are publishing his letter in our next issue because he is free to express himself as he sees fit. Again, we have already made his opinion known in the issue that followed the Piolet d’or. The important thing is that his opinion is known and that this leads to discussions on how to progress. Marko’s stance is constructive. If his thoughts are shared by even a few, then they have enough merit to evoke a more general attentiveness.  

Descamps: For the moment, Marko and his climbing partner have held on to the trophy, which they very much deserve. You would have to ask him what they intend to do with it, but that’s not what’s important. The important thing is, in my eyes, that in a more and more sterilized and globally positioned world, that there is still some place for that quest for the unknown, that thirst for adventure, the partnership of a single piece of rope. 

It sounds like Garibotti, Ermanno Salvaterra, and Alessandro Beltrami withdrew their climb from the event in 2005, but that the decision was to include it anyway — has this caused a conflict?

Rivaud: No. We have kept cordial relations with Rolando Garibotti.

Do you think Prezelj’s position that in the Piolet d’or “the commercial influence on the event is obvious and definite” is an oversimplification?

Rivaud: Yes. The Piolet d’or costs Montagnes magazine and Nivéales Editions time and money. We do not touch any supplementary bonuses or see any rise in salary (and ours is not much) for the organization of the event. However, this price does add a kind of notoriety to our title and our publishing house. But it is essentially all foreign attention, and we don’t have any intentions of marketing our magazine outside of  French-speaking countries. 

The absence of a Piolet d’or will not impede us from talking about the great mountaineering exploits in our magazine. It would, in fact, give us more time to do our work as journalists, without the work tied-up in the organization and logistics of the event gnawing away at us. 

I would say that those who profit the most from the Piolet d’or are the partnering labels and the nominated mountaineers themselves, who are often later solicited following the Piolet d’or to sell the images of their expeditions. 

Descamps:  Those who profit from the Piolet d’or are first and foremost the mountaineers and the sport of mountaineering in general. That’s what it’s made for.

It doesn’t have much to do between Montagnes magazine and Paris Match or between Climbing and Gutter Press. On this point, Marko kind of mixes everything up. For the eight years that I have participated in the Piolet d’or, never has a sponsor of a mountaineer influenced the jury or even tried to do so. 

On the grounds of journalism, it just so happens that I was once a professor of journalism at the university level and I wrote several strongly critical articles about the functioning of the general media. I am familiar with the ins and outs of the media and how it can skid out of control, and I would like someone to step forward and demonstrate to me how exactly the Piolet d’or could give the media that opportunity. 

Certain climbers never speak about what it is that they are doing, and I respect that. It’s not the case with Marko when he sells photos and runs a website  And I think he is correct to do so because it is worth the work in order to be recognized.