It's exactly the same. "Direct observation" only means "my senses are reporting X", and does not guarantee that X is true. It is *evidence* in support of X, often strong evidence, but not conclusive.
I understand why you would say as much. I refer to the manner in which sensory data is processed and acted upon. "My senses are reporting 'X'" already entails interpretation of the evidence insofar as the observer does not assert observation of 'Y'. I believe there is a proper distinction to be made between observing and interpeting what is observed.