One manager's perspective:

there is value in having the team present what they have done. there is an implicit pressure to "have something to show". Still such meetings take significant time, and thus one must weigh the cost of such updates. (if the updates are not of general importance for the whole team.)

but public feedback is generally too painful, and offers little benefit other than increasing the bludging that you are already doing. It is much easier to relax into criticism if it is just you and the criticizer, and you feel that the criticizer is keeping these assessments to themselves.

You can be on the same side as your manager if their criticism are targeted, and only between the two of you. If they are outing you publically, then it is just an attack from the enemy. so keep your feedback in a one-on-one setting for the really biting stuff.

that is my thought.