We kind of have that first-hand future already. Consider Trump's twitter feed. He speaks directly to the public, in a simple and direct way, largely immune to editing/manipulation. Sure, it's insane, but it's the most direct communication we've ever had from a president, and that's kind of impressive.

But in general, the problem with first hand sources is credibility. How do you know you can trust a first hand source you've never heard of? Are they giving us a complete or fair picture? Or are they either unintentionally or intentionally misleading us with incomplete/incorrect information?

I'd like to say the future is in credibility and integrity, but I fear that's actually the past. Now, people just believe what they want to believe, and pick and choose their facts to fit their internal narrative. It's nihilistic and terrifying, and I have no idea how society can resist it.

Reading a full unedited transcription of a speech from a president is also pretty direct...

that's existed for 150 years at least

i.e. https://yorkblog.com/yorkspast/read-the-actual-article-next-...

Unfortunately, most people lack the patience for such things. I remember in 2016, Hillary would give deeply detailed hour-long policy speeches about all sorts of stuff, and then her critics would claim she didn't have detailed plans. Sigh. (Not a question of whether you agree or disagree with them, but nobody rational writes and delivers an hour-long policy speech that's a straight-up lie about their intentions.)