For this to happen they have to turn their view of lisp from beauty to an effective tool to win on pragmatic points: time to develop, number of bugs, ease of adaptability. CL has a hammer for all this points but you have to see the field that way and produce things.. well basically 'less is more' vs 'perfectionism'
If a Lisper had come up with Jupyter notebooks before Python did, they could have captured the interest of academia.
If they'd come out with a Ruby On Rails framework before Ruby did, they could have made inroads in to the web development community.
That is, of course, if you could somehow get developers to embrace all the parenthesis, which seem to be an albatross around Lisp's neck that it can never shake.
Lisp does have one killer app, though: Emacs.
Jupyter notebooks are web based, and only require a web browser to use. That's not the case for org.
Using org effectively also means using Emacs, which is a high barrier of entry for most people.
Jupyter notebooks have no such requirements, and anyone can get rolling by just installing some packages and opening a web browser.
Jupyter notebooks are also really polished, while org is more bare bones visually.
Jupyter notebooks also have all these tools integrated in to it (all the graphing and inline image display tools are particularly appealing)
Yes, you could potentially do all of these with org, but it'd take way more knowledge and setup than is required for Jupyter notebooks.
If something as visually appealing, powerful, and easy to set up and use for people who don't know Emacs then it'd have a chance of getting widespread adoption. But that's not org.
Notebooks are only a thing because you don't need to install anything on work laptops and get around terrible IT policies.
They can't. They are all busy implementing another Lisp in Lisp.