Vanity Fair is responsible now for two major contributions to the Beto O’Rourke 2020 Democratic primary campaign.

First, the magazine helped the former Democratic Texas congressman launch his candidacy in March with the publication of a fawning, sugary sweet profile titled, “Beto O’Rourke, as He Comes to Grips with a Presidential Run: ‘I’m Just Born to Do This.'”

Now, Vanity Fair has published a lengthy exposé this week that acknowledges how newsrooms unquestioningly supported O’Rourke’s failed Senate campaign in 2018 — applying little to no scrutiny whatsoever, because it meant supporting the cause of unseating Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas.

The Vanity Fair article, which is meant to detail the press’s almost overnight evolution from O’Rourke superfan to critical antagonist, bears the startling but rather casual admission from the author, who writes:

The most obvious reason for Beto’s boom-and-bust media cycle is that running against a reviled Republican in Texas is a far cry from running in a Democratic primary against a bevy of qualified opponents, many of whom have devoted followings in various corners of the left.



…



As his esteem in elite circles collapsed, and as rival campaigns flooded the zone with questions about O’Rourke’s record in Congress and on the El Paso City Council, it became easier to tease O’Rourke on Twitter for the very things that made him refreshing in Texas: waving his arms around during speeches, standing on things R.F.K.-style while talking to crowds, skateboarding or listening to indie rock.

It is certainly nice to hear this said aloud by a newsroom that has done its fair share to promote “Betomania.” The author states correctly that the many things that now bother national media about O’Rourke were once praised by the same organizations in 2018 as exciting and refreshing.

[Also read: Beto O'Rourke: 'Nobody is born to be president']

Things like O’Rourke uploading an Instagram story featuring him getting his teeth cleaned while interviewing his dentist, or interviewing a barber about immigration in between talking about getting his ear hair trimmed (I am not making any of this up), are now the basis for punchlines at the Democratic candidate’s expense. That is quite a turnaround from when many of these same reporters and newsrooms hailed O’Rourke’s stupid attempts to go “viral” when he was running against Cruz. They did not mind Senate candidate O’Rourke skateboarding in a Whataburger parking lot or air drumming to The Who in a Whataburger drive-thru. On the contrary, this nonsense “beguiled national reporters” in 2018, Vanity Fair again correctly notes.

Why the change of heart? Because, as the profile suggests in so many words, that was then and this is now. O’Rourke was running against Cruz. Back then, national reporters were willing to ignore any shortcomings, including the Democrat’s hilariously thin political resume and his shameful attempt to flee the drunken car wreck he had caused. Media praised every stupid campaign stunt and actively elevated O’Rourke from unknown to national stardom because there was a chance to throw a Republican out of the Senate. Eyes on the prize and all that.

But now that the ex-Texas congressman is in a primary involving 22 fellow Democrats, O’Rourke’s “restlessness,” his “freewheeling earnestness,” and his Generation X dad routine is apparently no longer endearing. You rarely hear “Kennedyesque” or the “next Obama” mentioned in the same breath as "O'Rourke." You now hear “privileged” and “manchild.” The Vanity Fair profile suggests these criticisms are the product of "more press scrutiny" now that O’Rourke is aiming for the White House. But all this stuff about his whiteness and his privilege was obvious in 2018 when he was running against a Hispanic Republican, which raises the question: Where were these criticisms and scrutiny back then?

The fact that reporters and commentators are only now drawing attention to O’Rourke's lack of seriousness suggests they only care about these sorts of things when it can be used to benefit the candidate of their choosing. If nothing else, at least Vanity Fair, which is responsible for publishing probably one of the worst O’Rourke puff pieces to date, casually admits as much up front.