Straight answer: There is none. People only truly learn when they get hacked and something terribly goes wrong, possibly involving police and/or losing financial or intellectual property.
Analogy version: Being and acting online is like walking on a mine field. Better watch out for the mines because plenty of lives were destroyed already.
EDIT to add a response to downvotes:
Ok, let's talk about audience. People who value privacy and security in their lives but are not aware of virtual world complexity will listen and the more they learn, the more they'll want to learn, to the point where they'll learn on their own. The other group, the ones being quoted in the OP, most of them won't listen until it's too late.
Now imagine a company of 50 people that sells delicate products to a large population of people worldwide, where the main feature is discretion. It only takes 1 person being in the other group that a hacker will exploit to get into the system, steal the database, and ruin the whole company, including the lives of other 49 people.
Analogy: 10 people walk through a mine field as a group. One steps on the mine and all 10 get injured despite other 9 being extra careful.
It always boils down to human aspect, no matter how secure the system is. And we all know that there are people whose minds cannot be awoken or de-egoed by any amount of effort. If you 'know' better, then my friend, you are lying to yourself.
So instead of editing out the flaws, people should look how to improve the overall system including human aspect. Which means, rather than do more explaining, re-evaluating who does what and where and has access to what and where.
On the bright side, one thing I do agree with is that communication is key but that is just not enough to make your system secure these days.