Sometime in office you come to know that something the one senior to you in designation and who gives you work is saying in meeting as your fault is not correct or true. In such a case there are 2 options. Either to politely say that it was not your fault and give the reason for that or to stay quite as speaking may hurt his ego and later on you will be at a loss for this reason. Which of the two options would you choose when you clearly know it was not your mistake in a particular situation?
Well, in my case, I'd correct him. But I'm A) infallibly right and B) a major jerk.
In Asiatic countries, however, the tradition has been that the boss is infallibly right, even when he isn't and that you don't contradict him or cause him to lose face.
I consider that, however, to be a major reason why so much Indian software development work is considered poor quality (if you want a list of why so much western software development work is considered poor quality, I've got many tales to tell on that score, too. But I digress). When the boss is wrong, and you dare not correct him, the project can end up more like a death march than a creative effort.
Developers and designers have to have a fairly large degree of autonomy to do their job. Software development is an ongoing series of decisions, and if each and every choice that had to be made would have to be approved by the boss, nothing would ever get done. So the techniques that were OK when working in a bureaucratic office, a bank, or a factory don't carry over at all well and this means that you either have to break the mold or endure the consequences. I've known some people who went one way, some who went another. The mold-breaking ones tended to end up as bosses themselves.
For those who lack the fortitude to oppose directly, there are thousands of years of traditions on how to keep tyrants on the path without (often literally) losing your head. It does require sacrificing a part of your soul and a lot of your self-respect, but then again, so do many other things. Including, often, becoming the boss.
Being persecuted doesn't in any way prove your righteousness or your beliefs. Many people get persecuted because they are repugnant or annoying. Or just because they can be.
It depends on what it is or who is at the meeting. I might say something then. Or I might talk to the person privately later. But I would definitely say something. Otherwise you become the dumping ground for all problems.
At the same time, I will defend my teammates in a meeting. If someone did something wrong, the forum to discuss that is not a meeting with others.