In the era of social media, even the most private moments can become public spectacles — a reality one couple at a Burger King discovered when a bystander live-tweeted their breakup to thousands of followers.

The scene unfolded in a fast food restaurant, as these things sometimes do: a conversation that started quietly, then grew louder, then became unmistakably public. The bystander, apparently seated nearby with nothing better to do and a smartphone in hand, began posting real-time updates under a hashtag that quickly gained traction.

The tweets — describing the emotional escalation, the tearful accusations, the eventual storming-out — attracted retweets and comments from people who had never met either party and never would. By the time the couple's relationship ended, their ending had become entertainment.

The incident raised questions that social media has repeatedly forced but not fully resolved: what obligations do bystanders have to the privacy of strangers in public spaces? Does the fact that a conversation is audible in a public place constitute consent to its broadcast? Is live-tweeting someone's emotional crisis journalism, voyeurism, or something in between?

Legal scholars note that in most U.S. jurisdictions, there is no expectation of privacy in public spaces — meaning that what was posted was almost certainly not actionable. But the legal question and the ethical question are different.

The internet's appetite for real-time drama is insatiable. The people whose dramas feed that appetite rarely choose to be part of the content. The couple at Burger King didn't sign up to become a trending topic. They were just breaking up.