Journalists from some of Canada’s largest media organisations have thrown their support behind the creation of prize rewarding authors who seek to write about peoples and cultures that are not their own, in defence of a Toronto editor who resigned this week after promoting cultural appropriation.

The idea of the prize emerged from an opinion piece published in Write, the quarterly magazine put out by the Writers’ Union of Canada. In prefacing an issue focused on the work of Indigenous authors, editor Hal Niedzviecki said he did not believe in cultural appropriation.

“In my opinion, anyone, anywhere, should be encouraged to imagine other peoples, other cultures, other identities,” he wrote. “I’d go so far as to say there should even be an award for doing so – the Appropriation prize for best book by an author who writes about people who aren’t even remotely like her or him.”

Doing so could help Canadian literature shed its “exhaustingly white and middle class” identity, he added. “Get outside your own head. Relentlessly explore the lives of people who aren’t like you, who you didn’t grow up with, who don’t share your background, bank balance and expectations. Set your sights on the big goal: win the Appropriation prize.”

The piece sparked furore on social media. While some defended Niedzviecki’s idea, others described the piece as clueless and an insult to the indigenous writers who had contributed to the issue. The piece ignored that white, middle-class authors appropriate other cultures too often, said Alicia Elliott, one of the contributors to the issue. “Their voices are lifted up, while the people who are from those cultures are pushed down and kept outside the industry,” she wrote on Twitter.

The Writers’ Union soon weighed in, apologising for the pain and offence caused by the article. “We offer the magazine itself as a space to examine the pain this article has caused, and to take this conversation forward with honesty and respect,” the organisation noted in a statement. Niedzviecki also apologised and said he had resigned as editor, a job he had held for five years.

Niedzviecki’s argument, however, lived on, thanks to Ken Whyte, an editor whose three-decade career has spanned several of the country’s mainstream publications.

“I will donate $500 to the founding of the appropriation prize if someone else wants to organize,” Whyte wrote on Twitter late on Thursday.

Invoking the right of authors to imagine the lives of others, he rallied his counterparts on Twitter, describing the prize as a “good cause in a cosmopolitan, multicultural society.”

Whyte, a founding editor-in-chief of the National Post and editor-in-chief of Maclean’s, did not respond to a request for comment from the Guardian.

Thousands of dollars worth of pledges soon came tumbling in from half a dozen editors, media executives and columnists across Canada. “I’m in,” wrote Alison Uncles, the editor-in-chief of Maclean’s. She added: “$500 for freedom of thought and expression. Just me though, not Maclean’s.” Steve Ladurantaye, the managing editor of CBC News, said he was in for $100.

The fundraising drive proved just as contentious as the opinion piece that had sparked the idea.

@KenWhyte3 This seems a very childish response, honestly. The guy wrote an utterly stupid piece & there was blowback. Criticism ≠ Censorship. — Catherine Egan (@ByCatherineEgan) May 12, 2017

Imagine being a journo student of colour and watching like 3/4 of your potential future bosses tweeting about an appropriation prize — Rebecca Tucker (@RebeccaTee) May 12, 2017

“Imagine being a journo student of colour and watching like three quarters of your potential future bosses tweeting about an appropriation prize,” noted another.

Many drew links between the prize pledges and the stunning lack of diversity in Canadian media, while Helen Knott, one of the contributors to the magazine, pointed to the power held by those pledging the prize money. “The list is concerning though, because of the places and spaces they occupy and are in some form responsible for telling stories with whatever bias they have,” she noted in a Facebook post.

Hours later, a handful of journalists apologised. Anne Marie Owens, editor-in-chief of the National Post, said her support for the prize had stemmed from a defence of free speech.

Apologies for any offence caused by what began as free speech protest thread -- twitter no place for glib — Anne Marie Owens (@AnneMarieOwens) May 12, 2017

On Friday, Niedzviecki also sought to distance himself from the idea of creating a prize. “Calls for an actual ‘appropriation prize’ are extremely unhelpful. They do not represent me in any way,” he wrote in a statement.