The phrase "as something negative" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing a perception or interpretation of an idea, action, or situation that is viewed unfavorably.
Example: "Some people perceive the new policy as something negative, believing it will hinder productivity."
Alternatives: "as a drawback" or "as an adverse aspect".
"I don't think people should look at it as something negative.
"Since when is enforcing the law seen as something negative and inflammatory?" he asked his critics this week.
Being "political" was particularly looked on as something negative – a term I think we need to win back.
"Smells are seen as something negative, to be banished at all costs, but we've now become deodorised to the extent that people are developing an increasing number of allergies and environmental sensitivities.
"At first, it was seen as something negative: that foreigners would come in and take Spanish places, but free circulation has benefited everyone," says Francis Cagigao, a scout at Arsenal, but originally from Galicia.
"The Occupy Wall Street movement was a good one and had some important things to say about income inequality, but it singled out the 1% and painted them globally as something negative.
"I started to see a diagnosis as a good thing as opposed to something negative or limiting," said Douglas.
Bill Clinton set the gold standard for War Room response rates in 1992, as every time something negative came out about Clinton (most famously the "bimbo eruptions"), the Clinton camp would -- within the hour -- be choking news reporters' fax machines with rebuttals, fact sheets, truth-checking data, and other tidbits the reporters could use -- in the same news cycle the bad news broke in.
That friend has trusted you with his/her younger sister, and as such if something negative happens between the two of you it will affect your relationship with both siblings.
I vividly recall an article on "The Ingenious Eskimo," and being puzzled about why the writer called him ingenious — from what I knew, the prefix "in-" meant if not "non-" then something negative, as in "infamy".
This univocal concept is therefore a mistake, or an error, because nothing positive is really common to God and creatures, but only something negative, as the 'right' intellect subsequently acknowledges, when, going beyond the apparent initial indistinctness, it conceives in a distinct, separate way negatively indeterminate being and privatively indeterminate being.
